菜单
Prove and counter-prove a statement using parallel agents to eliminate confirmation bias. Use when someone says "dialectic", "prove/disprove", "stress test this claim", "is this really true", "argue both sides", or when a statement needs objective analysis from opposing viewpoints.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Build and deploy sites and Spot Show card/block visual reports on Spot, the internal hosting platform. Use when creating or updating a Spot site, showing plans, architecture diagrams, diffs, terminal output, JSON, screenshots, or when a site needs identity, database, realtime, file uploads, text AI, AI image generation, or Slack notifications.
Manage git worktrees with the gt utility for parallel feature development — create, switch, merge, and clean up worktrees without stashing or branch-switching.
Codex code review closeout: local dirty changes, PR branch vs main, parallel tests.
Use before any creative work or significant changes. Activates on "brainstorm", "let's brainstorm", "deep analysis", "analyze this feature", "think through", "help me design", "explore options for", or when user asks for thorough analysis of changes, features, or architectural decisions. Guides collaborative dialogue to turn ideas into designs through one-at-a-time questions, approach exploration, and incremental validation.
Run an LLM code review (OpenAI Codex + Anthropic Claude in parallel) on uncommitted changes or against a base ref. Use when user asks to "review my changes", "review uncommitted", "review against <ref>", "code review", "LLM review", "review branch vs <ref>", "second opinion on this diff".
Use after a fix or PR branch is already implemented when the user asks Codex to independently reproduce the original issue on a pre-fix baseline, apply the current branch's fix, reload/reset local data if needed, verify the actual corrected behavior through both data-level checks and realistic browser/UI flows when user-visible behavior is involved, investigate any remaining failures, and report evidence back without changing product code. Triggers include "reproduce then test the fix", "verify this branch locally", "prove the issue is gone", "use local dev env", "test API and browser", "make screenshots", "human test this", or "generate a report".
| name | dialectic |
| description | Prove and counter-prove a statement using parallel agents to eliminate confirmation bias. Use when someone says "dialectic", "prove/disprove", "stress test this claim", "is this really true", "argue both sides", or when a statement needs objective analysis from opposing viewpoints. |
| argument-hint | <statement to analyze> |
| allowed-tools | Bash, Read, Grep, Glob, Task, AskUserQuestion |
Objective analysis of a statement by running two agents with opposing goals in parallel, then synthesizing findings.
CRITICAL: Both Task tool calls MUST be in a single message for true parallel execution. Do NOT use run_in_background. Do NOT launch sequentially. Foreground agents in the same message run in parallel and block until both complete.
Agent 1 (Thesis) — find all POSITIVE evidence:
Agent 2 (Antithesis) — find all NEGATIVE evidence:
Both agents must provide specific file paths and line numbers when analyzing code.
After both agents complete, synthesize findings into an objective conclusion:
CRITICAL — after presenting the synthesis, verify it against actual implementation:
Architecture decisions:
/dialectic this microservice split improves maintainability
Bug analysis:
/dialectic the connection pool fixes the timeout issue
Performance claims:
/dialectic caching reduced database load by 80%
Refactoring safety:
/dialectic extracting this interface simplifies testing
Code review:
/dialectic this implementation is thread-safe
Review changes:
/dialectic review the changes in server.go