Detects logical contradictions, incompatible expectations, and conflicting statements across specs, tickets, and docs. Trigger — "find contradictions", "check for conflicts", "are these specs consistent", "do these docs agree". Skip when reviewing code quality or doing single-document editing.
Finds statements in a document or set of documents that directly or implicitly conflict with each other, making the plan internally inconsistent or impossible to satisfy simultaneously. This is formal consistency checking applied to planning artifacts: extract claims as propositions, check for logical contradictions, and report which cannot both be true.
Use when:
drift-detection which compares intent vs. implementation)Do NOT use when:
assumptions-audit)drift-detectionred-team-challenge)Index all claims: For each document or section, extract the key factual, numerical, and policy claims as a list. Be precise:
Group by topic: Cluster claims by subject area:
Compare within each cluster: Look for:
Identify implicit contradictions: Look for cases where two stated requirements, if both implemented, produce a logical impossibility:
Classify each contradiction:
Cite source locations: For each contradiction, quote both conflicting statements with their source document/section/line. Precision matters for resolution.
A numbered list of contradictions, each with:
End with a Resolution Priority section: which contradictions must be resolved before work can proceed (blocking) vs. can be resolved during implementation (non-blocking).
If documents are missing or inaccessible: