Skill: 0xrichyrich/agent-debate (version 1.0.0)

# 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 teams


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: suspicious | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)