Route artifacts across AI models for structured P1/P2/P3 critiques.
npx skills add https://github.com/fancive/claude-skills --skill debate-fancive
Please help me install this Agent Skill. Skill: debate Source: https://github.com/fancive/claude-skills/tree/main/skills/debate Command: npx skills add https://github.com/fancive/claude-skills --skill debate-fancive
Orchestrates automated cross-model debates to surface issues, compare perspectives, and drive informed decisions on code, proposals, or documents.
Start a debate by typing /debate and providing an initial artifact or allowing auto-detection from the workspace.
High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.
To run a cross-model debate, initiate the process and provide an initial artifact. The system auto-detects the artifact type and routes it through competing AI models to generate structured P1, P2, and P3 findings for your code review.
Yes, automated AI critique supports mixed content with deterministic splitting. It separates code and proposal artifacts to evaluate them through phase-based evaluation, ensuring structured critique and policy-aligned improvements for both types.
Multi-round critique routing coordinates competing AI models to iteratively analyze documents. This process compares perspectives across rounds, enforcing a structured output rubric with a final decision to help teams converge on high-priority issues and improvements.
Start a critique session by invoking the debate command and providing your initial proposal artifact. The system supports auto-detection from the workspace, deterministically managing the artifact to produce audit-ready session inputs and decisions.
Yes, cross-model debate enforces audit-ready session management. It tracks per-round inputs, critiques, and decisions, ensuring that code review sessions produce structured findings and policy-aligned improvements suitable for auditing.
Automated AI critique relies on deterministic splitting and phase-based evaluation for mixed content. While it enforces a structured P1/P2/P3 rubric, it requires clear artifact boundaries to effectively route and critique code, proposals, or documents.
ExuberantWitnessSimulates four research personas to critique proposals and generate a consensus report.
sliorEvaluate convergence across agent refinements and generate final synthesis documents.
julianobarbosaReview code for quality, bugs, security issues, and best practices using Codex.
eprouvezeRun parallel code reviews with Claude, Gemini CLI, and Codex CLI.
