AI Debate Report Skill

Description

--- name: debate description: | Claude and Codex(GPT) conduct a structured multi-turn debate on any topic, then generate a fact-checked HTML report. Trigger on: "/debate", "debate this", "AI debate", "ask both AIs", or any Korean equivalents. Optimized for topics with divergent opinions: stocks, tech outlook, policy analysis, product comparisons. user_invocable: true --- # AI Debate Report Skill Claude (Anthropic) and Codex/GPT (OpenAI) debate a topic, then a separate Reporter agent writes a verdict report. ## Usage ``` /debate <topic> ``` Examples: ``` /debate Samsung Electronics H2 2026 stock outlook /debate React vs Vue for new projects in 2026 /debate Can AI replace programmers? /debate Medical AI SaMD deregulation pros and cons ``` ## Required Artifacts Every execution MUST produce these files in `$DEBATE_DIR`: | File | Phase | Description | |------|-------|-------------| | `topic.md` | 0 | Merged key issues from both sides | | `rules.md` | 0 | Debate rules | | `analysis_claude.md` | 1 | Claude independent analysis | | `analysis_codex.md` | 1 | Codex independent analysis | | `round_{N}_claude.md` | 2 | Claude round N statement | | `round_{N}_codex.md` | 2 | Codex round N statement | | `factcheck_by_claude.md` | 3 | Claude fact-checks GPT claims | | `factcheck_by_codex.md` | 3 | GPT fact-checks Claude claims | | `report.html` | 4 | Final HTML verdict report | ## Procedure ### Phase 0: Setup 1. Create working directory: ```bash DEBATE_DIR="/tmp/debate/$(date +%Y%m%d_%H%M%S)" mkdir -p "$DEBATE_DIR" ``` 2. **Neutralized issue framing** (prevents single-side framing bias): - Call Claude subagent AND Codex **in parallel**, each proposing 3-5 key issues independently. - Merge both sides' proposed issues, deduplicate, and finalize 3-5 issues in `$DEBATE_DIR/topic.md`. 3. Generate debate rules document `$DEBATE_DIR/rules.md`: ```markdown # Debate Rules - Topic: {topic} - Key issues: {issue list} - Each statement: 500 words max - Claims must include evidence (data, cases, logic) - Quote and rebut opponent's claims - Debate ends when no new arguments emerge (requires mutual agreement) ``` ### Phase 1: Independent Analysis (parallel) Call Claude subagent (Agent tool) and Codex MCP **simultaneously** for independent analysis. #### Claude side (Agent tool) ``` "Analyze the following topic independently. Write a 500-800 word analysis with data and evidence. Topic: {topic} Issues: {issue list} Save to {DEBATE_DIR}/analysis_claude.md." ``` #### Codex side (MCP tool or CLI Fallback) **Method 1: MCP tool** (`mcp__codex__codex`) if available: ``` prompt: "Analyze the following topic independently. Write a 500-800 word analysis with data and evidence. Topic: {topic} Issues: {issue list} Respond in markdown." sandbox: "read-only" cwd: "{DEBATE_DIR}" ``` Save response `content` to `{DEBATE_DIR}/analysis_codex.md`. Record `threadId` for multi-turn use. **Method 2: CLI Fallback** (if no MCP): ```bash codex exec --full-auto --sandbox read-only --skip-git-repo-check \ -o "$DEBATE_DIR/analysis_codex.md" "<prompt>" ``` **CLI token management**: In CLI mode, multi-turn is unavailable, so full prior context must be included in each prompt. To prevent context explosion: - For rounds 1-2: include full prior statements. - For rounds 3+: summarize each prior statement to 150 words max before inclusion. - Total context passed to Codex CLI should not exceed 4,000 words per prompt. ### Phase 2: Free Debate (max 5 rounds) Each round proceeds as follows: #### Round N (odd: Claude first, even: Codex first) **Step 1: First speaker's statement** If Claude goes first: - Provide opponent's prior statement + independent analysis as context - Agent tool subagent call: ``` "Read the opponent (GPT)'s analysis/statement and rebut or supplement. Provide new evidence. Opponent statement: {prior codex statement} Write within 500 words. Save to {DEBATE_DIR}/round_{N}_claude.md." ``` If Codex goes first: - MCP: `mcp__codex__codex-reply` continuing the prior threadId - CLI: `codex exec --full-auto --sandbox read-only --skip-git-repo-check` with full context (apply summarization for rounds 3+) **Step 2: Second speaker's statement** (same approach, roles reversed) **Step 3: Convergence check (bilateral consensus)** Both sides independently judge whether to continue: 1. Ask Claude subagent: "Were new arguments or evidence presented this round? Respond with [CONTINUE] or [CONVERGED]." 2. Ask Codex the same question (MCP or CLI). 3. **End debate only if BOTH sides say [CONVERGED].** 4. If either says [CONTINUE], proceed to the next round. This prevents one side from unilaterally ending the debate at a strategically favorable moment. ### Phase 3: Fact-check After debate ends, each side fact-checks the opponent's top 3 claims. Run both in parallel. #### Claude's fact-check Agent tool subagent call: ``` "Select the top 3 key claims from Codex (GPT)'s entire debate statements. Verify whether each claim's evidence is sound. Rate each as [Confirmed / Refuted / Unverified] with reasoning. Each fact-check entry must include: - At least 80 words of analysis - Specific data sources or calculations where applicable Save to {DEBATE_DIR}/factcheck_by_claude.md." ``` #### Codex's fact-check MCP or CLI call: ``` "Select the top 3 key claims from Claude's entire debate statements. Verify whether each claim's evidence is sound. Rate each as [Confirmed / Refuted / Unverified] with reasoning. Each fact-check entry must include: - At least 80 words of analysis - Specific data sources or calculations where applicable Respond in markdown." ``` Save response to `{DEBATE_DIR}/factcheck_by_codex.md`. ### Phase 4: Report Create a **separate Reporter subagent** via the Agent tool. A new agent that did NOT participate in the debate reads the full record and writes the report. Reporter prompt: ``` You are a debate judge and reporter. Read the full debate record below and write an HTML report. ## Absolute Rules - No false balance. "Both sides have merit" conclusions are NOT allowed. - Clearly side with whichever side has stronger evidence. - Only if genuinely tied, explain exactly why, but never force artificial balance. - Refuted claims in fact-check MUST be reflected as deductions for that side. - Evaluate fact-check quality: consider depth of analysis, number of sources cited, and specificity of evidence. A longer, more detailed fact-check with primary sources carries more weight than a brief assessment. - DEBIASING: Do NOT trust Claude's claims more than GPT's simply because the Reporter is a Claude subagent. Treat both sides with equal scrutiny. If anything, apply extra skepticism to Claude's claims to compensate for potential in-group bias. ## Report Structure (HTML) 1. Header: topic, date, participants (Claude vs GPT) 2. Topic background (200 chars max) 3. Key issues summary (3-5 cards) 4. Debate highlights (key quotes per round) 5. Fact-check results table (Claim | Verdict | Evidence) 6. Final verdict: winner and reasoning (or close-call explanation) 7. Conclusion and implications (key takeaway for the reader) 8. Confidence level: state verdict confidence (High/Medium/Low) and list unresolved points ## Style - Professional yet readable tone - Backed by data and quotes - Clean HTML with Tailwind CSS CDN - Dark mode support - No em dashes ## Debate Record {Insert all file contents from DEBATE_DIR here} Save report to {DEBATE_DIR}/report.html. ``` ### Phase 5: Completion 1. Show report file path to user 2. Try to open in browser: ```bash explorer.exe "{DEBATE_DIR}/report.html" 2>/dev/null || \ open "{DEBATE_DIR}/report.html" 2>/dev/null || \ echo "Report: {DEBATE_DIR}/report.html" ``` 3. Display debate summary (2-3 lines) to user ## Notes - Full debate takes roughly 3-5 minutes depending on round count - Codex calls use ChatGPT Pro Plan authentication (not API billing) - Debate records are stored in /tmp and will be lost on reboot; copy elsewhere if needed - Investment-related debates must include a disclaimer: not financial advice

Security Status