I've heard postfiat kritiks being described as "non-unique disadvantages" and "arguments that challenge assumptions in the resolution."
However, I'm unsure on where the line is drawn.
If the Pro case assumes a utilitarian framework, would challenging that utilitarianism with an alternate framework, such as egoism or deontology, be a kritik? The intuitive answer is "no," but a popular argument on DDO that "suffering is good and we should seek suffering" has been described as a kritik -- that seems logically equivalent to proposing a different framework.
Is an impact turn a kritik?
What about a radical counterplan? (e.g. in the debate "RONA should adopt a new conflict of interest policy," if Con advocates a counterplan of shutting down all HOAs; or, in the debate "we should implement a system of school vouchers," if Con advocates a counterplan of banning all private schools)