--- name: "source-command-debate" description: "Open a multi-agent deliberation — a council of specialist voices debate a hard question with tiered research, a synthesizer converges, the result feeds an ADR. (ADR-0035 / ADR-0070)" --- # source-command-debate Use this skill when the user asks to run the migrated source command `debate`. ## Command Template Run a **deliberation** on: **$ARGUMENTS** A deliberation is PRE-DECISION working material (ADR-0035): a council of genuinely independent SPECIALIST voices argues a hard question, a separate synthesizer converges, and the result feeds an ADR's Context. It is NOT the canonical record of the *why* — the ADR is. This is a strategic, intelligent debate, not an essay. 0. **Conditional requirement.** An explicit `/debate` always runs. A governed `needsDebate: true` classification or a debate requirement in the selected workflow/skill also requires the council before the affected material decision is finalized. Outside those triggers, `deliberations` config may control optional suggestions. Routing output recommends the model; it never authorizes the council or turns legacy receipt fields into prerequisites. 1. **Frame the question.** Restate `$ARGUMENTS` as a single decision question with just enough context for an independent reader to take a side. If it's too vague to debate (no real tension, or several questions tangled), ask one clarifying question before spending agent calls. 2. **Plan the council.** Run `node contextkit/tools/scripts/deliberation-council.mjs plan --question "" --json`. It returns the **specialist roster** (relevant advisor-lane owners — e.g. `architect`, `security`, `ux-designer` — scaled `council.min..max` by the question, ADR-0070) and the **tiered research plan** (scout / verify / voice models). Use this roster instead of anonymous "Voice A/B/C". If `autoSelect` is off, the plan returns N generic positions — fall back to the legacy flat debate. 3. **Gather evidence (cheap scouts).** If `research.tiered`, FIRST run `node contextkit/tools/scripts/context-pack.mjs --for-subagent --objective ""` for the bounded boot pack (ADR-0044 D1). Then dispatch **scout** sub-agents at the `research.scouts` model (Haiku/`fast`) IN PARALLEL — one per concrete fact the debate needs (existing patterns, current behaviour, a config value, a prior ADR). Each scout reads at most a couple of files and returns one verifiable fact with its source (`file:line` / command output). Collect these into an **evidence pack**. The point is economy: the reasoning voices spend premium tokens on judgment, not lookups. Skip only when the question is purely abstract. 4. **Fan out to the council (reasoning voices).** Dispatch one sub-agent **per council member** with the Task tool, IN PARALLEL, each at the `research.voices` recommended voice model when available. Missing or incompatible routing output does not block the council or make the requirement disappear; use the current agent/model and **blind to the others' arguments** — independence is the whole point (ADR-0035). Embed the context-pack + the evidence pack at the top of every voice prompt. Each voice argues from its **specialist lens** (the `agent`/`lane` from the plan), takes ONE distinct position on a genuinely different axis (correctness vs. cost vs. reversibility/blast-radius vs. UX vs. security), and returns its strongest one-paragraph case + the trade-off it accepts. CONCISE, OBJECTIVE, HIGHLY TECHNICAL. 5. **Verify the hard claims (powerful tier, optional).** If a position rests on a claim that needs checking in a larger context than a scout can hold, dispatch a verifier at the `research.verify` model (Sonnet/`powerful`) to confirm or refute it. Fold the verdict into the synthesis — never let an unverified claim decide. 6. **Synthesize (you, not the voices).** You are the orchestrator (reasoning tier) — you argued no position, so you declare the outcome. Weigh the cases: which wins on which axis, what each loser contributes, the decisive trade-off. Then either: - **Consensus** → a clear verdict, OR - **`unresolved`** → record the positions + the unresolved tension as the trade-off the human must break. A VALID outcome, not a failure. Do not manufacture agreement to look decisive. 7. **Write the artifact.** Copy `contextkit/memory/deliberations/_TEMPLATE.md` to `contextkit/memory/deliberations/--.md` (`NN` = highest existing + 1, zero-padded; start at `01`). Fill Question / **Evidence** / Positions (one `### —