workflow-debate

Orchestrate structured adversarial debates between AI councillors to evaluate ideas.

1|Updated Feb 26, 2026

Search Tags:#decision making #evaluation #debate #adversarial #multi-perspective #stress test

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/Devattom/.claude --skill workflow-debate-devattom

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: workflow-debate
Source: https://github.com/Devattom/.claude/tree/main/skills/workflow-debate
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Devattom/.claude --skill workflow-debate-devattom

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) and scripts (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a structured method for rigorously evaluating ideas, plans, or decisions by simulating a debate among AI councillors with distinct perspectives, surfacing blind spots and ensuring thorough consideration.

Core Features & Use Cases

Structured Adversarial Debate: Simulates a debate between AI agents representing different viewpoints (visionary, critic, pragmatist, etc.).
Multi-Perspective Analysis: Ensures ideas are stress-tested from various angles, leading to more robust outcomes.
Use Case: When deciding on a major architectural change, use this Skill to have a visionary highlight opportunities, a critic identify risks, and a pragmatist assess feasibility, culminating in a nuanced verdict.

Quick Start

Use the workflow-debate skill to evaluate the idea of migrating our monolith to microservices.

Frequently Asked Questions about workflow-debate

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

FAQPage Schema

How do I stress test a decision using multi-perspective analysis?▼

Multi-perspective analysis stress tests a decision by simulating a structured adversarial debate between AI councillors. This surfaces blind spots by having agents cross-examine an idea from distinct viewpoints like visionary, critic, and pragmatist.

What is adversarial debate for evaluating architectural decisions?▼

Adversarial debate for architectural decisions is a structured method where AI agents simulate opposing viewpoints to rigorously evaluate a plan. It highlights risks, opportunities, and feasibility through parallel deliberation and cross-examination.

Can I configure the number of debate rounds and councillor perspectives?▼

Yes, you can configure both the number of rounds and the specific councillor perspectives for the debate. This allows you to customize the depth of cross-examination and the specific angles used to evaluate your idea or plan.

What's the best way to evaluate risks and opportunities for a major plan?▼

The best way to evaluate risks and opportunities for a major plan is through a structured adversarial debate. By orchestrating AI agents to argue different perspectives, you ensure the plan is rigorously tested for feasibility and blind spots.

When should I use an adversarial debate approach instead of standard evaluation?▼

Use an adversarial debate approach instead of standard evaluation when you need to rigorously evaluate a complex idea and surface blind spots. It is ideal for major decisions like migrating a monolith to microservices where multiple perspectives are critical.