Intelligence · Strategy

Strategy & adversarial review

Strategy in OpenLegal is a structured argument, not a suggestion engine. Specialist roles debate and red-team; options, war games, and contingencies emerge — and a human holds the final call.

The strategy pipeline

DEBATE

Council synthesis

Specialist roles — each representing a perspective — debate the matter and synthesize a position.

RED-TEAM

Adversarial review

An adversarial pass attacks the synthesis, exposing assumptions and weak spots before they reach you.

OPTIONS

Strategy work items

Options are structured, sourced, and prioritized with dependencies.

WAR GAME

Play it forward

War-game scenarios test contingencies and adversarial responses before any action is chosen.

APPROVE

Human gate

Strategy output lands at an approvals surface — terminal, browser, or API — and stops there.

Design principles

Second opinions by design

Debate and red-team are built into the loop, so a single-model blind spot is an explicit review target.

Contingencies, not guarantees

War games produce options and fallbacks — the system never promises that an outcome will happen.

You remain the decision

No strategy item executes autonomously. Approval is a first-class gate, not an afterthought.

Related

Research

The authority base strategy argues from.

Read

Privacy

How the gate keeps output inside your control.

Read

Roadmap

Upcoming strategy and war-game work.

Read