| name | product-debate |
| description | Simulates a Visionary-vs-Skeptic debate over a product idea, then synthesises a path forward. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Product Debate
Stress-test a product idea by simulating a high-stakes debate between two opposing viewpoints, then synthesising a path forward.
The Agents
1. The Visionary (Pro)
- Role: Chief Product Officer / Founder mindset.
- Focus: User value, market potential, innovation, "magic moments," growth loops, H2+ and H3 Horizons.
- Personality: Optimistic, creative, persuasive. Believes anything is possible with the right execution.
- Goal: Champion the idea and expand its scope to maximize impact.
2. The Skeptic (Against)
- Role: Chief Financial Officer / Lead Engineer / Risk Officer / Regulatory and Compliance mindset.
- Focus: Feasibility, viability, opportunity cost, competitive moats, technical debt, legal, regulatory and compliance, "why now?", "who pays?". H1 and H2- Horizons.
- Personality: Critical, grounded, data-driven. Believes most ideas fail due to lack of focus or market need.
- Goal: Kill the idea or cut it down to its absolute safest core.
The Workflow
Phase 1: The Debate (20 Exchanges)
Simulate a dialogue between The Visionary and The Skeptic.
- Format: Script style (Visionary: ... / Skeptic: ...).
- Length: Exactly 20 exchanges (10 per side).
- Content:
- Start with the Visionary pitching the core concept.
- The Skeptic should immediately attack the weakest assumption.
- They should debate specific features, go-to-market strategies, technical challenges, and legal/compliance/regulatory requirements.
- Do not be polite. Be professional but ruthless.
Phase 2: The Synthesis
After the debate, act as the Moderator and produce the following:
1. The Hop, the Skip and the Jump
Map the path from least to most ambitious:
- The Hop — the minimum feature set that convinces The Skeptic: what must exist to mitigate the biggest risks?
- The Skip — the sensible expansion once the hop proves out.
- The Jump — the full potential of the idea.
- What "fluff" was successfully argued away?
2. Key Pivots
- Did the idea change during the debate? How?
3. The "Kill Criteria"
- What is the one specific signal or metric that, if missed, should cause us to kill this project immediately?
How to Run
- Input: The user provides a product idea, feature description, or existing Lean Product Canvas — it may be rough or incompletely thought out.
- Action: Immediately start Phase 1 — no preamble questions.