Run a research-first, multi-perspective debate to explore complex technical decisions (trade-offs, architecture choices, integration strategies) using concrete codebase evidence.
Run a research-first, multi-perspective debate to explore complex technical decisions (trade-offs, architecture choices, integration strategies) using concrete codebase evidence.
Use when the user asks to "debate" approaches, compare options, or needs a structured exploration before deciding.
Similar popular skills
Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.
Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.
Claude CodeNot declared
CursorNot declared
CodexNot declared
GitHub CopilotNot declared
WindsurfNot declared
Gemini CLINot declared
ClineNot declared
OpenCodeNot declared
Package contents
Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.
skill mdSKILL.md1,321 B
docsSUMMARY.md314 B
History
First recorded snapshot · 0 installs
SKILL.md
Cursor Debate
Overview
Structure an evidence-based “debate round” to surface ideas and trade-offs; the debate does not decide, it informs the human decision-maker.
Workflow
1) Define the question
Write the precise decision question (1 sentence).
2) Choose candidates
Include 3–6 perspectives total.
- Human personas (pragmatist, architect, researcher, integrator, tool builder) - Optional “code entity” personas (actual modules/symbols), backed by real file evidence
3) Research first (required)
For each candidate, list questions they need answered.
Run concrete repo inspection (examples):
- rg -n "...", git grep, git log -p -- <path>, go test ./..., etc.
Record commands + key outputs in “Pre-Debate Research”.
4) Debate round
Opening statements (Round 1)
Rebuttals (Round 2)
Moderator summary (tensions, trade-offs, open questions)
Output template
Use the canonical outline in references/debate.md.