# Debate

> Run a multi-round deliberation between reviewers. Unlike /panel (which synthesizes), /debate has reviewers respond to each other's arguments across rounds until tensions resolve or reach acknowledged stalemate.

- Skill: `everyinc/debate` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add everyinc/debate`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/everyinc/debate/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: everyinc (https://skillmd.com/u/everyinc)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/everyinc/debate

---


# Debate Review

Orchestrate a structured deliberation between reviewer agents. Reviewers don't just give feedback in parallel—they engage with each other's perspectives, challenge each other's recommendations, and work toward resolution (or acknowledged stalemate).

## When to Use /debate vs /panel

| Use | When |
|-----|------|
| `/panel` | You want multiple perspectives synthesized. Fast. Tensions surfaced for you to decide. |
| `/debate` | You want reviewers to actually argue it out. More thorough. Tensions may resolve through deliberation. |

**Choose /debate when:**
- The piece is high-stakes and worth the extra rounds
- You want to see how perspectives hold up under challenge
- You suspect some tensions might resolve if reviewers engaged each other
- You want proposals and compromises, not just "you decide"

**Choose /panel when:**
- You want comprehensive feedback quickly
- You're comfortable resolving tensions yourself
- Time/tokens are a concern

## The Deliberation Flow

### Round 1: Initial Positions

Same as /panel—all reviewers analyze the draft independently.

### Round 2: Challenges

The moderator identifies tensions and sends challenges to involved reviewers:

```
## Challenge: The fishing gear paragraph

**The passage:**
> "His tackle box was a museum of failures—rusted lures from the '70s..."

**hemingway said:**
> "47 words that could be 15. Cut it."

**sedaris said:**
> "This is the most alive moment in the piece. Keep every word."

---

**hemingway:** sedaris argues the specificity earns its place. How do you respond?

**sedaris:** hemingway argues this slows momentum. How do you respond?
```

### Round 3: Responses

Reviewers respond in character. They may:

- **Concede** — "On reflection, the detail does earn its place. I withdraw."
- **Hold** — "The momentum problem remains. Even good details hurt here."
- **Propose** — "Keep the first image, cut the extended list. Satisfies both."

### Round 4: Resolution

For each tension:
- **Resolved** — Reviewers agree (via concession or proposal)
- **Stalemate** — Reviewers hold, fundamental value difference
- **Proposal on table** — Compromise offered, writer decides

The moderator may run additional rounds if proposals generate new discussion, but caps at 4 rounds.

## The Flow in Practice

### 1. Load Context

Read the draft and .status.yaml:
- piece_type
- audience
- stage
- goals

### 2. Propose Panel

Same as /panel—propose 4-6 reviewers based on context.

```
## Proposed Panel for Debate

**Draft:** [title]
**Context:** [piece_type] for [audience], [stage]

| Reviewer | Why |
|----------|-----|
| **[name]** | [Rationale] |
| **[name]** | [Rationale] |

**Note:** Debate works best with reviewers who have natural tensions.
Consider including pairs like:
- hemingway + sedaris (economy vs. specificity)
- mom + hitchcock (clarity vs. mystery)
- sorkin + vonnegut (speed vs. depth)

Proceed with this panel, or adjust?
```

Wait for user confirmation.

### 3. Round 1: Run Reviewers

Spawn all reviewers in parallel. Collect outputs.

### 4. Round 2: Identify Tensions and Generate Challenges

Analyze outputs for conflicts. For each significant tension:
- Quote the passage
- Present both positions
- Generate challenge prompts

Spawn challenged reviewers with the challenge context.

### 5. Round 3: Collect Responses

Each reviewer responds to their challenge:
- Concede, Hold, or Propose
- With reasoning

### 6. Round 4: Resolution and Additional Rounds

Determine resolution status. If proposals warrant further discussion, run another round (max 4 total).

### 7. Final Synthesis

Return the debate-moderator's synthesis:
- Resolved tensions (with how they resolved)
- Stalemates (with final positions and stakes)
- Proposals (compromise options)
- Consensus findings (non-debated)
- The hard question

## Panel Selection for Debate

Debate is most valuable when the panel includes natural tensions:

| Pairing | Tension Type | Good For |
|---------|--------------|----------|
| hemingway + sedaris | Economy vs. Specificity | Deciding what earns its length |
| mom + hitchcock | Clarity vs. Mystery | Balancing accessibility and tension |
| mom + hemingway | Context vs. Brevity | What explanation is necessary |
| sorkin + sedaris | Momentum vs. Observation | Pacing of descriptive passages |
| sorkin + vonnegut | Speed vs. Depth | When to slow for character |
| asshole + sedaris | Rigor vs. Voice | Tone of argument pieces |

**Recommendation:** Include at least one natural tension pair in your panel.

## Example Session

```
User: /debate

Agent: I'll run a deliberation on your draft. Let me read it and propose a panel.

[Reads draft]
[Reads .status.yaml: piece_type: essay, audience: general, stage: revision]

## Proposed Panel for Debate

**Draft:** father-and-the-sea
**Context:** personal essay for general audience, revision stage

| Reviewer | Why |
|----------|-----|
| **hemingway** | Check economy—personal essays can get overwritten |
| **sedaris** | Find the specific, human, funny moments |
| **sorkin** | Verify pacing through emotional beats |
| **mom** | General audience accessibility check |

**Natural tensions:** hemingway/sedaris (economy vs. specificity),
sorkin/sedaris (momentum vs. observation)

Proceed with this panel, or adjust?

User: yes

Agent: Running Round 1—each reviewer analyzing independently.

[Spawns 4 reviewers in parallel]
[Collects outputs]

Round 1 complete. Analyzing for tensions.

## Tensions Identified

### Tension 1: The tackle box paragraph
**hemingway** wants to cut; **sedaris** wants to keep every word.

### Tension 2: Section 3 pacing
**sorkin** says it stalls; **sedaris** says the observation is the point.

### Tension 3: Ending explanation
**mom** wants more; **sorkin** says trust the reader.

Proceeding to Round 2 with 3 challenges.

[Spawns challenged reviewers with challenge context]
[Collects responses]

## Round 2 Responses

**Tension 1:**
- hemingway: HOLD — "Momentum matters more than any single detail."
- sedaris: PROPOSE — "Keep 'museum of failures' and the pug. Cut the Reagan line."

**Tension 2:**
- sorkin: CONCEDE — "If the observation is the point, I was wrong to call it a stall."
- sedaris: (no concession needed)

**Tension 3:**
- mom: HOLD — "I still don't know what he learned. That's a real gap."
- sorkin: PROPOSE — "One specific image of the lesson. Not explanation—scene."

Proceeding to final synthesis.

## Debate Synthesis

**Panel:** hemingway, sedaris, sorkin, mom
**Rounds:** 2
**Context:** personal essay for general audience, revision stage

---

### Resolved Tensions

**Section 3 pacing**

> [The observation passage]

**Resolution:** Sorkin conceded. The slow pace is intentional and earns its place.
**Recommendation:** Keep as-is. The observation is the point.

---

### Stalemates

*None—all tensions reached resolution or proposal.*

---

### Proposals

**The tackle box paragraph**

> "His tackle box was a museum of failures—rusted lures from the '70s,
> a reel that hadn't worked since Reagan, hooks that had never caught
> anything but his own thumb."

**Proposed revision:** "His tackle box was a museum of failures—hooks
that had never caught anything but his own thumb."

**Proposed by:** sedaris (compromise with hemingway)
**Would satisfy:** Keeps the voice and "museum" metaphor, cuts the catalog
**Trade-off:** Loses the temporal sweep ("'70s," "Reagan")

---

**The ending**

**Proposed revision:** Add one concrete image showing what you learned,
rather than explaining it.

**Proposed by:** sorkin (compromise with mom)
**Would satisfy:** Mom gets clarity; sorkin keeps momentum
**Trade-off:** Requires writing new material

---

### Consensus Findings

| Issue | Flagged By | Recommendation |
|-------|------------|----------------|
| Opening is slow | hemingway, sorkin | Start on the boat |
| "He taught me everything" unearned | all | Show, don't declare |

---

### The Deliberation Summary

**Resolved:** 1 tension resolved through concession
**Stalemates:** 0
**Proposals:** 2 compromise options for your consideration

---

### The Hard Question

> The debate kept circling one thing: you're telling us the relationship
> mattered without showing us what made it irreplaceable. The ending
> proposal addresses this—but only if you write a scene that earns it.
```

## Token Economics

Debate is more expensive than panel:

| Phase | Approximate Tokens |
|-------|-------------------|
| Round 1: Initial reviews | 4-6 reviewers × ~8K = 32-48K |
| Round 2: Challenges | 3-4 tensions × 2 reviewers × ~4K = 24-32K |
| Round 3: Responses | Same reviewers × ~3K = 18-24K |
| Round 4: Resolution (if needed) | ~10K |
| Synthesis | ~8K |
| **Total** | ~90-120K tokens |

For high-stakes pieces, worth it. For routine editing, use /panel.

## Error Handling

**If a reviewer fails to spawn:**
- Note the gap
- Proceed with available reviewers
- Tensions involving that reviewer won't be debated

**If no tensions identified:**
- Skip to synthesis
- Report as "No significant tensions—reviewers largely aligned"

**If a reviewer doesn't respond to challenge:**
- Treat as implicit HOLD
- Note non-response in synthesis

**If debate goes circular:**
- Moderator calls stalemate after positions repeat
- Cap at 4 rounds regardless

## Relationship to /panel

`/panel` and `/debate` share infrastructure:
- Same reviewer agents
- Same context loading from .status.yaml
- Same panel proposal logic

The difference:
- `/panel` → synthesizer (one pass, tensions surfaced)
- `/debate` → moderator (multiple rounds, tensions engaged)

A natural workflow: run `/panel` first for quick feedback, then `/debate` on specific tensions if you want them argued out.

## Lessons

[Skill-specific lessons will be added here as they're captured]