Hi, in my opinion you could approach in either ways where by first highlighting the strengths of the work you are reviewing, and then following up with the limitations could build up your argument, as it creates a positive impression of the work before pointing out its shortcomings. However, it's important to make sure that you are still being objective and critical in your analysis of both the strengths and limitations.
Alternating between strengths and limitations as you go through your review could also be efficient. This can be a way to create a more balanced and nuanced presentation of your arguments, and can also help to avoid the impression of bias that can come with presenting all strengths or all limitations in a row.
Hope this helps, Regards!