Agent-Skills.md

Agent Skills: Devil's Advocate

Structured critical analysis using parallel advocate and critic agents. Use when asked to evaluate a decision, play devils advocate, challenge an approach, or weigh pros and cons of architecture/technology choices.

UncategorizedID: hairihou/dotfiles/devils-advocate

Repository

hairihou/dotfiles
hairihou

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/hairihou/dotfiles/tree/HEAD/src/.claude/skills/devils-advocate

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for devils-advocate.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

src/.claude/skills/devils-advocate/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
devils-advocate
Description
Hold both the supporting and the opposing view on something the user has stated — the case for and the case against, argued in parallel — to surface tensions, risks, and decision factors. Use when the user wants a stated idea, decision, or approach examined from both angles at once.

Devil's Advocate

Surface the tensions in $ARGUMENTS by arguing both sides independently, then synthesizing.

1. Gather Context

Glob/Grep to locate related code, docs, and config; Read up to 5 key files. Note the current state, constraints, affected systems, and existing patterns.

2. Run Both Agents in Parallel

Launch the advocate and critic as two Agent calls in a single message — each gets the gathered context but is blind to the other's output, so neither side anchors to the other. Read each prompt from ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/agents/advocate.md and critic.md, substituting {{topic}} and {{context}}.

3. Synthesize

Present both outputs faithfully — no editorializing — then where they conflict:

  • Advocate / Critic: each side's argument as returned
  • Key Tensions: a table pairing each claim against its counter
  • Decision Factors: what information or validation would resolve each tension — the actionable part

Common Mistakes

  • Topic too broad — narrow "frontend strategy" to "adopting React Server Components for the dashboard"
  • Editorializing before both sides are presented faithfully
  • Treating the debate as the output — Decision Factors are the deliverable