multi-agent-deliberation
Use for high-stakes decisions: architecture forks, build-vs-buy, competitive response, major refactors, or when the user wants multi-agent debate. Spawns diverse perspectives (or Codex second opinion) and synthesizes a recommendation. Do NOT use for trivial choices or every small implementation detail.
Datos de origen
- Repositorio
- AVIDS2/avid-skill
- Última actividad en el origen
- 23 de julio de 2026 a las 16:24
- Idioma detectado de SKILL.md
- inglés
- Estrellas
- 1
- Forks
- 0
Opciones de instalación
De forma predeterminada está seleccionado el prompt que primero revisa el origen. Puedes cambiar a un comando directo o descargar una copia local.
Revisa los archivos de origen
Lee SKILL.md y los archivos complementarios que muestra SkillsMP antes de decidir si quieres instalarlo.
Mostrando SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Instrucciones de origen · Vista previa de solo lectura- name
- multi-agent-deliberation
- description
- Use for high-stakes decisions: architecture forks, build-vs-buy, competitive response, major refactors, or when the user wants multi-agent debate. Spawns diverse perspectives (or Codex second opinion) and synthesizes a recommendation. Do NOT use for trivial choices or every small implementation detail.
# Multi-Agent Deliberation
When a wrong call is expensive, prefer competing lenses — then decide. **Optional**: skip for clear choices or when the user wants speed.
## When to Use
- Build vs buy / build vs wrap competitor
- LangGraph vs Pi vs custom orchestration (after `agent-framework-choice` still unclear)
- "Should we pivot given competitor X?"
- Large rewrite vs incremental
- User explicitly asks for multi-agent or second opinion
## Procedure
### 1. Frame the decision
Write:
- Question (one sentence)
- Constraints (time, skills, stack, distribution)
- Success metric
- Deadline / reversibility (one-way door?)
### 2. Run 2–3 lenses (parallel when possible)
Pick lenses that disagree productively:
| Lens | Focus |
|------|--------|
| **User/value** | Does this help the buyer this month? |
| **Risk/security** | What fails in prod? |
| **Tech debt / YAGNI** | Simplest path (ponytail spirit) |
| **Competitive** | How does this position vs named alternatives? |
| **Codex/rescue** | Independent second implementation or review |
Implementation options:
- Claude Code `Agent` tool with distinct system prompts per lens
- Codex plugin `/rescue` or `/adversarial-review` when available
- Sequential self-roles only if subagents unavailable (label each role clearly)
### 3. Synthesize (you, main agent)
Produce:
```markdown
## Decision question
## Options
## Lens votes (table)
## Recommendation
## Dissent / residual risks
## What would change the decision
## Proposed next experiment (smallest test)
```
Do **not** average into mush. Pick a recommendation. Surface dissent.
### 4. User owns the call
Present synthesis; user confirms. Record in `docs/decisions/` or dev-log when multi-session.
## Anti-Patterns
- Five agents agreeing with the same prompt (fake diversity)
- Deliberating UI padding color
- Hiding the recommendation behind "it depends" with no default
- Skipping research gates by debating vibes only — attach evidence
## Related
- `product-bootstrap`, `research-before-build`, `agent-framework-choice`
Ver en GitHub