Skip to main content

dissenter

Run two independent perspectives before giving user-facing advice, making a recommendation, or evaluating a choice: one analyzes the user's prompt as written and one supplies the strongest credible dissent. Use whenever two plausible answers or courses of action exist, including routine, low-stakes personal choices; skip routine execution, factual lookups, and status questions.

소스 정보

저장소
devinat1/skills
최근 소스 활동
2026년 8월 23일 18:39
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
1
포크
0

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
dissenter
description
Run two independent perspectives before giving user-facing advice, making a recommendation, or evaluating a choice: one analyzes the user's prompt as written and one supplies the strongest credible dissent. Use whenever two plausible answers or courses of action exist, including routine, low-stakes personal choices; skip routine execution, factual lookups, and status questions.
# Dissenter Stress-test a choice without manufacturing a debate. ## Advice gate This is the authoritative gate for every owned skill that gives user-facing advice. Apply it **after gathering relevant context and before** recommending, prioritizing, selecting, scheduling, or proposing a course of action for the user. Low stakes do not bypass the gate: routine personal recommendations such as choosing a meal qualify when two credible answers exist. Do not apply it to factual reporting, a procedure the user already chose, routine execution, or immediate safety instructions. When the gate applies: 1. Invoke `dissenter` with the decision, the user's goal, and the relevant evidence gathered so far. 2. Present the two views below without selecting a winner or default. 3. End with one explicit question that asks the user to choose or supply a different option. 4. Wait for that answer before taking an action that depends on the choice. This gate overrides any local instruction to make a recommendation, choose a priority, or advance automatically. ## Dispatch 1. Confirm the request asks for advice, a choice, a proposal, a recommendation, or a plan with at least two credible answers. If it does not, answer normally. 2. Launch exactly two independent subagents in parallel. Do not give either agent the other's response. - **Original:** Send the user's request plus the gathered context. Ask it for one viable course of action, its assumptions, and tradeoffs. It must not claim to choose for the user. - **Dissent:** Send the same request and context. Ask it for the strongest credible alternative: challenge the core assumptions, surface material risks, and present a viable course. Do not use a literal inverse or a straw man. 3. Wait for both agents. Do not substitute the coordinator's own answer for either perspective. ## Return Return only this concise structure: ```markdown ## Original view [direct analysis] ## Opposing view [counter-analysis] ## Takeaways - [meaningful agreement, if any] - [decision-critical disagreement or assumption] ## Your decision [one question that lets the user choose a view or name another option] ``` Do not force a winner or recommendation. Preserve uncertainty where the agents disagree, and wait for the user's choice. ## Partial results If one agent fails or is unavailable, return the completed view under its heading and write `Unavailable: [brief reason]` under the missing heading. Still include only takeaways supported by the available result.
GitHub에서 보기