Have agents argue opposing positions from the same evidence, then synthesize, so the strongest case for each option is heard before deciding. Use when a decision is genuinely contested and one agent's answer would hide the trade-off.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add Amey-Thakur/AI-SKILLS --skill agent-debate-protocol --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Agent Debate Protocol?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/amey-thakur-agent-debate-protocol)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: agent-debate-protocol
description: Have agents argue opposing positions from the same evidence, then synthesize, so the strongest case for each option is heard before deciding. Use when a decision is genuinely contested and one agent's answer would hide the trade-off.
---
# Agent debate protocol
Asking one agent for a recommendation gets you a confident answer with
its counterarguments buried. Debate surfaces them by construction:
advocates argue their assigned side properly, and the synthesis has to
account for both rather than for one.
## Method
1. **Fix the options before the debate.** Two or three concrete
positions. Advocates argue the given options; letting them invent new
ones mid-debate turns argument into brainstorming.
2. **Assign sides, and require genuine advocacy.** Each agent argues its
position as strongly as the evidence permits, including where the
evidence is thin. Balanced advocates produce mush.
3. **Give every advocate the same evidence.** Differences should come
from interpretation, not from information asymmetry, or the debate is
decided by who was told more.
4. **Run at least one exchange.** Opening statements alone are parallel
monologues; a rebuttal round is where weak arguments are exposed.
5. **Have a separate synthesizer.** Not one of the advocates, since an
advocate cannot fairly weigh its own case (see
agent-pricing-committee for a worked example).
6. **Require the synthesis to state the losing case's strongest
point.** If it cannot, the debate was not real.
7. **End with a recommendation and its conditions.** What would have to
be true for the other option to win, which is what makes the decision
reviewable later (see agent-decision-log).
## Boundaries
Debate clarifies trade-offs; it does not produce truth, and a confident
advocate can win an argument the evidence does not support. It costs
several times a single query, so reserve it for consequential and
genuinely contested decisions. Humans decide; the pack is an input (see
agent-human-checkpoint).
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!