rhetoric

Record structured thoughts with revision history for multi-model deliberation.

Updated Dec 14, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Raudbjorn/cognitive-construct --skill rhetoric
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rhetoric
Source: https://github.com/Raudbjorn/cognitive-construct/tree/main/rhetoric
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Raudbjorn/cognitive-construct --skill rhetoric

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill requires httpx, pydantic, and includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

Complex problem-solving often leads to unstructured thinking, cognitive biases, and suboptimal decisions. This Skill provides a robust framework for structured reasoning, multi-perspective deliberation, and pattern analysis to overcome these challenges.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Thought Recording & Tracking: Record thoughts with full revision history and branching, ensuring no idea is lost.
  • Multi-Model Deliberation: Orchestrate debates between multiple AI models (e.g., Claude, GPT, Llama) to gain diverse perspectives and reach consensus on complex questions.
  • Cognitive Bias Detection: Review thinking patterns using VibeCheck integration to identify and mitigate common cognitive biases like analysis paralysis.
  • Use Case: Before committing to a major architectural change like "Should we use microservices or a monolith?", use the deliberate command to get a multi-faceted debate from different AI models, complete with a confidence-scored consensus.

Quick Start

Deliberate on a critical question using multiple AI perspectives: python3 scripts/rhetoric.py deliberate "Should we use microservices or monolith?" --rounds 3

Frequently Asked Questions about rhetoric

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I structure reasoning for complex decisions across multiple AI models?

Structured reasoning for decisions involves recording thoughts with full revision history and orchestrating deliberation between multiple AI models to gain diverse perspectives. This Skill records branching thought paths, detects patterns that reveal cognitive biases, and generates consensus summaries—enabling you to trace how your reasoning evolved and identify blind spots before committing to major choices.

Can I detect cognitive biases in my problem-solving process?

Yes. This Skill integrates VibeCheck pattern analysis to review your thinking patterns and surface common cognitive biases like analysis paralysis. By tracking revision history and branching thoughts across deliberation sessions, you identify recurring decision traps and interrupt them before they degrade outcome quality.

How do I run a multi-model debate to reach consensus on architectural decisions?

Use the deliberate command to orchestrate debates between multiple AI models on a single question, specify the number of rounds, and receive a confidence-scored consensus. The Skill manages session state, tracks each model's reasoning, generates transcripts, and produces summaries—streamlining collaborative problem-solving without manual coordination.

What output does this Skill generate from a deliberation session?

Deliberation produces automatic transcripts capturing all model contributions, structured summaries with confidence scores, full revision history showing how reasoning evolved, and pattern analysis identifying cognitive biases. These artifacts support audit trails, decision documentation, and downstream analysis of reasoning quality.

Do I need specific Python dependencies to use this Skill?

Yes. This Skill requires httpx for multi-model API orchestration and pydantic for structured thought and session data validation. Both are lightweight libraries; httpx handles concurrent calls to multiple AI endpoints, and pydantic ensures revision history and branching paths remain consistent throughout deliberation.

When should I use structured deliberation instead of making decisions alone?

Use structured deliberation for high-stakes architectural or strategy decisions where cognitive bias, incomplete perspectives, or suboptimal reasoning poses significant risk. Multi-model debate is most valuable when the decision affects system design, resource allocation, or long-term commitments—cases where diverse reasoning and bias detection justify the deliberation overhead.