Running Devil's Advocate on my own petition was uncomfortable in a useful way

Went in expecting mild pushback and got genuinely pointed counterarguments to claims I'd been fairly confident about. Worth doing, but worth going in prepared for it to feel more adversarial than the Officer Simulator's commentary does. The most useful part wasn't the counterarguments to my strong claims — it was the ones aimed at claims I hadn't even realized were doing a lot of load-bearing work in my narrative. One in particular: I'd been leaning on a single reference letter to establish that a specific contribution was "widely adopted," and the counterargument correctly pointed out that one letter-writer's opinion isn't the same as adoption evidence. That's an obvious gap in hindsight, but I hadn't seen it until it was stated back to me directly. It's not comfortable reading your own case argued against, but that's sort of the point — an RFE won't be gentle either, and this is the version of that pressure-test you get to see before filing, not after.