debatelisted

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.
sumitake/agent-collab · ★ 0 · AI & Automation · score 65

Install: claude install-skill sumitake/agent-collab

## Unified runtime invocation Resolve the **plugin root** from this loaded file: `SKILL.md` is at `<plugin-root>/skills/<skill-name>/SKILL.md`. Invoke only `python3 "<plugin-root>/coordinator.py"` and send one bounded JSON request on stdin. Before constructing it, read the **Coordinator request schema** in `<plugin-root>/README.md`; never invent fields or route/action pairs. The public coordinator re-observes the active host/model, captures artifact provenance, excludes same-family routes, and verifies the co-packaged native manifest. It runs standalone from the installed plugin. Never discover a provider executable or reconstruct a raw command. Frontmatter `tier` is a routing recommendation, never a coordinator request field. For a review, cross-check, tiebreaker, or fallback over an authored artifact, capture its exact UTF-8 content and observed author model in the optional `artifact` object even when governance is false; never paste it into the prompt as a provenance substitute. # Debate — structured adversarial advocacy with synthesis A debate is not a second opinion. A second opinion asks one independent reader to find blind spots. A debate asks **both sides to advocate maximally** for opposing positions, then asks the agent — stepping out of advocacy — to render a verdict. The point is to **stress-test conviction**, not to manufacture consensus. If the debate ends with "both sides have good points," it failed. The cross-family setup matters: the active primary (reso