deliberation

Solid

Multi-perspective synthesis structure — Innovator (propose) → Devil-Advocate (challenge) → Mediator (synthesize) 3-layer execution. Outputs conditional verdicts without binary win/loss. Activates on "deliberation", "battle this out", "weigh the pros and cons", "review from multiple angles", "which side is right?". Optional deep-insight persona jurors for domain-specific views. Designed for design decisions, skill proposals, and architectural choices.

AI & Automation 8 stars 0 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 79/100

Stars 20%
32
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# deliberation — The Forge Skill Innovator (propose) → Devil (challenge) → Mediator (synthesize) 3-layer core structure. The goal is not to pick a winner — it is to **extract salvageable fragments from the losing argument and produce a conditional verdict**. Even those who struggle to challenge assumptions can use this structure as a rope to reach better decisions. > **Role distinction from sim-conductor and steel-quench** > - sim-conductor: **validates** quality and consistency of a completed asset > - steel-quench: **adversarially stress-tests** a near-complete artifact (post-build defect surfacing) > - deliberation: perspective clash during the **design decision process** → synthesis (upstream of both) --- ## Triggers - `/deliberation` - "battle this out", "make them argue", "clash and synthesize" - "review this decision from multiple angles" - When agent-composer Step 4-b proposes `Wave next-D` automatically ### Natural Language Triggers (for general users — activates without internal vocabulary) Also activates when design decisions or perspective clashes are expressed in natural language: | Example phrase | Intent | |---|---| | "I'm not sure whether to do this or not" | Decision uncertainty → multi-perspective synthesis | | "It seems like opinions are divided" | Perspective clash → synthesis layer needed | | "Help me decide which side is right" | Conditional synthesis, not simple winner selection | | "Someone will probably object to this" | Request for devil's ad...

Details

Author
chrono-meta
Repository
chrono-meta/forge-harness
Created
2 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
Shell
License
MIT

Integrates with

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

debate

Stage a structured multi-round adversarial debate between the active primary and the reviewer on a binary or near-binary proposition. Each side is assigned (or self-selects) an opposing position and defends it through openings, rebuttals, and an optional closing round; the agent then steps out of advocacy and synthesizes a verdict for the user. Use when the user says "debate this with the reviewer," "argue both sides," "steelman both positions," "play devil's advocate with the reviewer," "the active primary vs the reviewer on X," "have the reviewer argue the other side," or "make the case against." Also offer this proactively when the user is leaning hard one way on a high-stakes binary choice and a structured opposing case would stress-test the conviction better than a polite second opinion would.

0 Updated today
sumitake
AI & Automation Solid

adjudicator-synthesis

Use when you have run 2 or more agent-council deliberator skills on the same artifact (Skeptic, Voice & Identity, Evidence & Calibration, Strategy & Stakes) and want their structured critiques synthesized into a single SHIP / REVISE / HOLD verdict with a concrete revision brief. Encodes the Adjudicator role from the agent-council 5-perspective quality gate. The Adjudicator does not produce a new critique — it produces the decision document the operator acts on.

9 Updated 1 weeks ago
Avyayalaya
AI & Automation Solid

decision-council

Forces 5 AI advisor personas to argue about a decision, anonymously peer-review each other, and synthesize a verdict with anti-false-consensus guardrails. Auto-detects high-stakes decisions from context. Trigger on: pricing, deal terms, partnerships, market entry, investments, exit strategies, go/no-go calls, trading decisions, DeFi/protocol entry, market entry/exit, futures positions, training program changes, competition prep, injury decisions, career moves, big purchases, financial planning, macro economic events (central-bank decisions, FX, inflation), geopolitical developments affecting markets, major AI/Web3/tech releases that change capability or competitive landscape, or any question where being wrong costs money, health, or reputation. Also trigger on "run council", "stress test", "what am I missing", "devil's advocate", "sanity check", or when the user leans toward an answer already. Do NOT trigger for brainstorming, writing, code, factual lookups, routine daily choices, or low-stakes ops.

2 Updated 3 days ago
0xUrsanomics