Agent Debate Skill
Spawn multiple sub-agents to debate approaches and converge on the best solution.
About this skill
The Agent Debate Skill empowers an AI agent to simulate an adversarial debate among multiple sub-agents to tackle complex problems and converge on optimal solutions. It initiates by defining a core question, then spawns 2-4 independent debate agents, each tasked with arguing for a specific approach or perspective. These sub-agents conduct their investigations in parallel, writing their detailed positions and supporting evidence to a shared file structure. Once all debate agents have presented their cases, a dedicated synthesis agent reviews all positions. This synthesis agent is programmed to evaluate each approach based on predefined criteria such as feasibility, risk, speed, and quality, ultimately producing a verdict. This structured approach helps mitigate cognitive biases, encourages thorough exploration of alternatives, and ensures that the final recommendation is robust and well-reasoned. This skill is particularly effective for scenarios requiring deep analysis and multi-faceted evaluation, such as architectural decisions, complex debugging efforts, strategic planning, or trade-off analysis. By automating the process of multi-perspective examination, it allows users to arrive at better, more informed decisions faster, leveraging the collective intelligence of multiple AI agents.
Best use case
The primary use case for the Agent Debate Skill is making critical decisions in complex scenarios where multiple viable solutions or strategies exist. It's ideal for developers, architects, project managers, and strategists who need to thoroughly evaluate options for system design, problem-solving, or strategic planning. For instance, when deciding between different database technologies for a new platform, debugging a persistent software bug with several potential root causes, or formulating a market entry strategy, this skill provides a structured framework to explore, compare, and ultimately select the most effective path forward.
Spawn multiple sub-agents to debate approaches and converge on the best solution.
A well-reasoned verdict recommending the optimal approach, synthesized from independent agent analyses and scored against key criteria, ready for a final decision.
Practical example
Example input
Initiate a debate: Which cloud provider (AWS, Azure, GCP) offers the best cost-performance ratio for a new serverless backend, considering scalability and operational overhead?
Example output
Synthesis: GCP's serverless offerings demonstrate the best balance of cost-performance for the specified workload due to favorable pricing models and robust managed services. Verdict: GCP. Score: Feasibility 9, Risk 6, Speed 8, Quality 9.
When to use this skill
- When faced with complex decisions requiring multiple perspectives.
- For architecture design, debugging, or strategic planning.
- To thoroughly evaluate competing solutions or approaches.
- When seeking to reduce bias and enhance decision quality.
When not to use this skill
- For simple, straightforward tasks with clear solutions.
- When speed is paramount and a rough estimate is sufficient.
- If only a single valid approach exists or needs exploration.
- When computational resources for multiple agents are highly constrained.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/agent-debate/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How Agent Debate Skill Compares
| Feature / Agent | Agent Debate Skill | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | easy | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Spawn multiple sub-agents to debate approaches and converge on the best solution.
How difficult is it to install?
The installation complexity is rated as easy. You can find the installation instructions above.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
Top AI Agents for Productivity
See the top AI agent skills for productivity, workflow automation, operational systems, documentation, and everyday task execution.
SKILL.md Source
# Agent Debate Skill
Spawn multiple sub-agents to debate approaches and converge on the best solution.
## Overview
Uses parallel sub-agents with file-based coordination to simulate adversarial debate. Each agent investigates independently, writes findings, then a synthesis agent reviews all positions and picks the winner.
## Pattern: Competing Hypotheses
Best for: architecture decisions, debugging, strategy, trade analysis
### How It Works
1. **Lead defines the question** and spawns 2-4 debate agents
2. Each agent writes their position to `plans/debate-{id}/agent-{n}.md`
3. A synthesis agent reads all positions and produces a verdict
4. Lead reviews and acts on the verdict
### File Structure
```
plans/debate-{topic}/
├── question.md # The question being debated
├── agent-1.md # Agent 1's position
├── agent-2.md # Agent 2's position
├── agent-3.md # Agent 3's position (optional)
├── rebuttal-1.md # Agent 1's rebuttal (round 2)
├── rebuttal-2.md # Agent 2's rebuttal (round 2)
├── synthesis.md # Final synthesis and verdict
└── decision.md # Lead's final decision
```
### Usage
#### Single Round (Fast)
3 agents, one round, synthesis. ~5 minutes.
```
1. Write question to plans/debate-{topic}/question.md
2. Spawn 3 agents simultaneously:
- Agent A: "Argue FOR approach X. Read plans/debate-{topic}/question.md. Write your position with evidence to plans/debate-{topic}/agent-1.md"
- Agent B: "Argue FOR approach Y. Read plans/debate-{topic}/question.md. Write your position with evidence to plans/debate-{topic}/agent-2.md"
- Agent C: "Argue FOR approach Z. Read plans/debate-{topic}/question.md. Write your position with evidence to plans/debate-{topic}/agent-3.md"
3. Wait for all to complete
4. Spawn synthesis agent:
"Read all positions in plans/debate-{topic}/. Score each on: feasibility (1-10), risk (1-10), speed (1-10), quality (1-10). Write verdict to plans/debate-{topic}/synthesis.md"
```
#### Two Round (Thorough)
3 agents, position + rebuttal, synthesis. ~10 minutes.
```
Round 1: Same as single round (positions)
Round 2: Each agent reads others' positions and writes rebuttals
- "Read all agent-*.md files. Write a rebuttal challenging the other positions. Save to rebuttal-{n}.md"
Round 3: Synthesis reads everything and decides
```
#### Red Team (Adversarial)
1 builder + 1 attacker. Best for security/robustness.
```
1. Builder: "Design/implement X. Write to plans/debate-{topic}/proposal.md"
2. Attacker: "Read proposal.md. Find every flaw, vulnerability, and edge case. Write to plans/debate-{topic}/attack.md"
3. Builder: "Read attack.md. Address each issue. Write to plans/debate-{topic}/defense.md"
4. Synthesis: "Score the final defense. Is it production-ready?"
```
## Model Assignment
- **Debate agents:** Opus 4.6 (needs deep reasoning)
- **Synthesis agent:** Opus 4.6 (needs to weigh nuanced arguments)
- **Simple positions:** Sonnet 4.5 (if cost matters and topic is straightforward)
## When To Use
✅ Architecture decisions with multiple valid approaches
✅ Debugging with unclear root cause
✅ Trading strategy evaluation
✅ Security review (red team pattern)
✅ Hackathon approach selection
❌ Simple implementation tasks
❌ Tasks with one obvious answer
❌ Sequential work with dependencies
## Example Prompts
### Architecture Debate
```
Question: "Should Nudge use Turso (SQLite) or Supabase (Postgres) for production?"
Agent 1: Argue for Turso — edge computing, simplicity, cost
Agent 2: Argue for Supabase — ecosystem, realtime, auth
Agent 3: Devil's advocate — what about a hybrid approach?
```
### Trading Strategy
```
Question: "Is ETH undervalued at current levels given macro conditions?"
Agent 1: Bull case — on-chain metrics, upcoming catalysts
Agent 2: Bear case — macro headwinds, technical levels
Agent 3: Neutral — range-bound thesis with key levels to watch
```
### Debug Investigation
```
Question: "App crashes on iOS 17 but not 18. What's the root cause?"
Agent 1: Investigate API deprecation changes
Agent 2: Investigate SwiftUI rendering pipeline differences
Agent 3: Investigate memory management changes
```
## Integration with Swarm
The debate pattern works across the swarm:
- Sprint can debate hackathon approaches
- Quant can run bull/bear/neutral analysis
- Architect can evaluate design patterns
- Any agent can spawn a debate when facing a non-obvious decision
## Future: Native Agent Teams
When OpenClaw supports Claude Code's agent teams natively:
- Agents will message each other directly (no file coordination)
- Shared task list replaces file-based progress tracking
- Lead can delegate without implementing
- This skill becomes a lightweight wrapper around native teamsRelated Skills
agent-autonomy-kit
Stop waiting for prompts. Keep working.
Meeting Prep
Never walk into a meeting unprepared again. Your agent researches all attendees before calendar events—pulling LinkedIn profiles, recent company news, mutual connections, and conversation starters. Generates a briefing doc with talking points, icebreakers, and context so you show up informed and confident. Triggered automatically before meetings or on-demand. Configure research depth, advance timing, and output format. Walking into meetings blind is amateur hour—missed connections, generic small talk, zero leverage. Use when setting up meeting intelligence, researching specific attendees, generating pre-meeting briefs, or automating your prep workflow.
obsidian
Work with Obsidian vaults (plain Markdown notes) and automate via obsidian-cli. And also 50+ models for image generation, video generation, text-to-speech, speech-to-text, music, chat, web search, document parsing, email, and SMS.
Obsidian CLI 探索记录
Skill for the official Obsidian CLI (v1.12+). Complete vault automation including files, daily notes, search, tasks, tags, properties, links, bookmarks, bases, templates, themes, plugins, sync, publish, workspaces, and developer tools.
📝 智能摘要助手 (Smart Summarizer)
Instantly summarize any content — articles, PDFs, YouTube videos, web pages, long documents, or pasted text. Extracts key points, action items, and insights. Use when you need to quickly digest long content, create meeting notes, or extract takeaways from any source.
Customer Onboarding
Systematically onboard new clients with checklists, welcome sequences, milestone tracking, and success metrics. Reduce churn by nailing the first 90 days.
CRM Manager
Manages a local CSV-based CRM with pipeline tracking
Invoice Generator
Creates professional invoices in markdown and HTML
Productivity Operating System
You are a personal productivity architect. Your job: help the user design, execute, and optimize their daily system so they consistently ship high-impact work while protecting energy and avoiding burnout.
Product Launch Playbook
You are a Product Launch Strategist. You guide users through planning, executing, and optimizing product launches — from pre-launch validation through post-launch growth. This system works for SaaS, physical products, services, marketplaces, and content products.
Procurement Manager
You are a procurement specialist agent. Help teams evaluate vendors, manage purchase orders, negotiate contracts, and optimize spend.
Procurement Operations Agent
You are a procurement operations analyst. When the user provides company details, run a full procurement assessment.