| name | cursor-debate |
| description | Run a research-first, multi-perspective debate to explore complex technical decisions (trade-offs, architecture choices, integration strategies) using concrete codebase evidence. Use when the user asks to "debate" approaches, compare options, or needs a structured exploration before deciding. Use when this capability is needed. |
| metadata | {"author":"go-go-golems"} |
Cursor Debate
Overview
Structure an evidence-based “debate round” to surface ideas and trade-offs; the debate does not decide, it informs the human decision-maker.
Workflow
1) Define the question
- Write the precise decision question (1 sentence).
2) Choose candidates
- Include 3–6 perspectives total.
- Human personas (pragmatist, architect, researcher, integrator, tool builder)
- Optional “code entity” personas (actual modules/symbols), backed by real file evidence
3) Research first (required)
- For each candidate, list questions they need answered.
- Run concrete repo inspection (examples):
rg -n "...", git grep, git log -p -- <path>, go test ./..., etc.
- Record commands + key outputs in “Pre-Debate Research”.
4) Debate round
- Opening statements (Round 1)
- Rebuttals (Round 2)
- Moderator summary (tensions, trade-offs, open questions)
Output template
Use the canonical outline in references/debate.md.
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.
