git:20260615.7a62936 to git:20260615.48da2e0

---

name: adversarial-debate-protocol

description: Structured debate protocol that constructs an advocate, deploys critic

attacks, and renders a judge verdict through iterative rounds.

execution: tactic

dependencies:

sops:

- advocate-construction

- critic-attack

- judge-verdict

---

# Adversarial Debate Protocol

A formal three-role debate structure ensuring decisions survive rigorous adversarial challenge. The protocol assigns distinct roles (advocate, critic, judge) to prevent confirmation bias and ensure intellectual honesty.

## Stages

1. **Advocate Construction** — Build the strongest possible case for the position under debate

2. **Critic Attack** — Attack the advocate's case from multiple angles with severity ratings

3. **Judge Verdict** — Impartial assessment of advocate case vs critic attacks, rendering ACCEPT/REJECT/REVISE

4. **Iteration** (if REVISE) — Advocate revises case, critic re-attacks, judge re-evaluates

## Available SOPs

| SOP | Role | Purpose |

|-----|------|---------|

| advocate-construction | Advocate | Build strongest case for position |

| critic-attack | Critic | Attack the case with rated arguments |

| judge-verdict | Judge | Render impartial verdict |

## Execution Guidance

- Minimum 2 rounds before accepting ACCEPT verdict

- Critic must produce >= 3 distinct attack arguments per round

- Judge must address every critic argument explicitly

- If judge verdict is REVISE, advocate must address specific weaknesses identified

- Maximum 4 rounds before escalating to strategy level

## Minimum Yield

- Advocate case with explicit evidence and reasoning

- Critic attacks with severity ratings (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)

- Judge verdict (ACCEPT/REJECT/REVISE) with point-by-point reasoning

- Conditions for acceptance (if ACCEPT)

- Required modifications (if REVISE)