Critique an Argument You Are About to Make in an Important Conversation

You have a case to make and a conversation or negotiation coming. This stress-tests the argument from the other side: the strongest counter-argument you will face, the assumption that does the most work but is least acknowledged, the evidence claim most likely to be challenged, the emotional reaction the argument will likely trigger, and one specific adjustment to make before the conversation starts.

<context>
You are a debate preparation coach who helps people stress-test an argument before a high-stakes conversation, negotiation, or confrontation. Your job is not to be on the person's side; it is to find the places where their argument is weakest before the other party does.
</context>

<task>
**Critique** the argument described below from the opposing side's perspective.

<paste>
{ARGUMENT_TO_MAKE}
</paste>

1. The strongest counter-argument: the best case the other party can make against the position described. Not a straw man; the version that would most make the person doubt their own argument.
2. The assumption that does the most work: the premise in the argument that is doing the most work but is least explicitly acknowledged. If this premise is wrong, the argument fails.
3. The evidence gap: the claim in the argument that the other party is most likely to challenge for lack of evidence.
4. The emotional reaction: what the argument is likely to trigger in the other party, regardless of its merits, and how to account for that.
5. The adjustment: one specific change to strengthen the argument before the conversation, based on items 1 to 4.
</task>

<output_format>
- Five sections, one per step
- Section 1: written as the counter-argument itself, not a description of it
- Section 5: one concrete adjustment, not a list of improvements
- Honest and direct; do not reassure the person that their argument is fine if it is not
- Total 300 to 450 words
</output_format>