Outer Review
Process an external AI review to extract actionable tasks. The human commissions the external review and saves the raw output; this skill processes it.
When to Use
- •When
/outer-review [filepath]is invoked with a new outer review file - •After a human has commissioned and saved an external AI analysis
Why External Review Matters
The Unfinishable Map's content is primarily generated and reviewed by Claude-based systems. This creates risk of:
- •Confirmation bias: The reviewing system shares assumptions with the generating system
- •Blind spot persistence: Gaps in Claude's knowledge propagate undetected
- •Style homogenization: Content converges toward patterns Claude favors
- •Coherence inflation: Arguments seem stronger than they are because the reviewer finds them compelling for the same reasons the writer did
External AI systems (GPT-4+, Gemini, etc.) have different training, different biases, and different blind spots. Their disagreements are informative even when wrong.
Prerequisites
The human must:
- •Commission a review from an external AI system (ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.)
- •Save the raw output to
obsidian/reviews/outer-review-YYYY-MM-DD-[system-slug].md - •Add basic frontmatter (or leave for this skill to add)
Instructions
1. Read the Review File
The filepath is provided as an argument: /outer-review obsidian/reviews/outer-review-2026-01-15-site-chatgpt-5-2-pro.md
Read the file and assess its current state.
2. Add/Fix Frontmatter
Ensure the file has proper frontmatter:
--- title: "Outer Review - [System Name]" created: YYYY-MM-DD modified: YYYY-MM-DD human_modified: null ai_modified: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS+00:00 draft: false topics: [] concepts: [] related_articles: - "[[project]]" ai_contribution: 90 author: [Human who commissioned it] ai_system: [external-system-id] ai_generated_date: YYYY-MM-DD last_curated: null --- **Date**: YYYY-MM-DD **Reviewer**: [System name and version] **Type**: Outer review (external AI analysis) ## About This Review An "outer review" is an analysis performed by an external AI system rather than the Claude-based workflow that generates most site content. This provides an independent perspective, reducing the risk of self-reinforcing blind spots. [External system's review content follows...]
3. Convert Links to Internal Format
The external system will likely use external URLs. Convert these to internal wikilinks:
- •
https://unfinishablemap.org/tenets/→[[tenets]] - •
https://unfinishablemap.org/topics/free-will/→[[free-will]] - •
https://unfinishablemap.org/concepts/qualia/→[[qualia]]
This improves navigation and maintains link integrity.
4. Evaluate Review Quality
Read through the review and categorize findings:
High value findings:
- •Logical gaps not previously noticed
- •Counterarguments not addressed
- •Inconsistencies between pages
- •Missing connections that should exist
- •Novel framings of existing positions
Lower value findings:
- •Objections already addressed elsewhere
- •Misunderstandings of the position
- •Requests to adopt a different position entirely
- •Style preferences that don't affect clarity
5. Generate Tasks
For high-value findings, create tasks in obsidian/workflow/todo.md:
### P1: [Specific issue from outer review] - **Type**: [research-topic | expand-topic | refine-draft | cross-review] - **Notes**: From outer review YYYY-MM-DD. [Brief description of the issue and why it matters] - **Source**: outer-review - **Generated**: YYYY-MM-DD
Priority guidance:
- •P1: Logical errors, internal contradictions, unaddressed strong objections
- •P2: Missing connections, expansion opportunities, clarity improvements
- •P3: Style suggestions, minor enhancements
6. Log to Changelog
Append to obsidian/workflow/changelog.md:
### HH:MM - outer-review - **Status**: Success - **Reviewer**: [System name] - **File**: [filepath] - **High-value findings**: [count] - **Tasks generated**: [count with priorities]
7. Commit
Create a git commit:
feat(auto): outer-review - process [system name] analysis - Identified [N] actionable issues - Generated [N] tasks (P1: X, P2: Y, P3: Z)
Evaluating Impact (After Tasks Complete)
After tasks from an outer review have been completed, evaluate the review's value:
- •Count completed tasks: How many issues were addressed?
- •Assess depth: Did the review surface deep insights or obvious issues?
- •Track new content: What articles/sections resulted from the review?
- •Note patterns: What kinds of issues does this external system catch that internal review misses?
This helps calibrate future review frequency and system selection.
Important
- •This skill requires manual invocation with a filepath argument
- •The human commissions and saves the external review; this skill processes it
- •External systems may have different biases—their criticism isn't automatically correct
- •The goal is diverse perspective, not consensus
- •Some external criticism will be based on misunderstanding—that's expected
- •Focus on actionable findings that improve content quality