skill-debate
FeaturedStructured multi-provider AI debates between Claude and available advisors — use for critical decisions
Install
Quality Score: 99/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- nyldn
- Repository
- nyldn/claude-octopus
- Created
- 6 months ago
- Last Updated
- today
- Language
- Shell
- License
- MIT
Integrates with
Bundled in these plugins
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
debate
Stage a structured multi-round adversarial debate between the active primary and the reviewer on a binary or near-binary proposition. Each side is assigned (or self-selects) an opposing position and defends it through openings, rebuttals, and an optional closing round; the agent then steps out of advocacy and synthesizes a verdict for the user. Use when the user says "debate this with the reviewer," "argue both sides," "steelman both positions," "play devil's advocate with the reviewer," "the active primary vs the reviewer on X," "have the reviewer argue the other side," or "make the case against." Also offer this proactively when the user is leaning hard one way on a high-stakes binary choice and a structured opposing case would stress-test the conviction better than a polite second opinion would.
debate
Use when a technical decision has 2–4 nameable positions and the user wants a recommendation, not open-ended exploration. Triggers include "X vs Y", "A or B", "pick one", "contested trade-off", adversarial review, and decide-between requests. Skip when analysis is open-ended (use superpowers:brainstorming) or the question has no real contest. Keywords: debate, decision, contested, trade-off, versus, steelman, adversarial, argue.
ccc-debate
Adversarial multi-agent debate (antfooding): fan out N agents that argue and critique a design or diff from distinct lenses until issues resolve, then synthesize a verdict.