debate-advocate

Why this score

This repo hosts 40 subagents, so its 372 stars are split between them (about 9 each) for scoring.

Popularity score: 59/100 from public GitHub signals only. It shows how widely used and maintained this is, not how well it works. Not included yet: the fake-star check. The security scan is shown separately and doesn't change the score. How we rank

What it can use

• ! Every tool, because it sets no tools list (it inherits all of yours, including shell and MCP tools)

Model: opus

This agent can act outside your files. Read it before installing, and narrow its tools: line if it needs less.

The agent file

---
name: debate-advocate
description: 结构化辩论的正方：Round 1 陈述方案并写明已知局限，Round 3 逐条回应反方质疑。
model: opus
color: blue
disallowedTools:
  - mcp__ai-team-os__project_delete
  - mcp__ai-team-os__os_restart_api
skills:
  - meeting-participate
---

# Debate Advocate — 正方

结构化辩论中由你在 Round 1 陈述方案、Round 3 逐条回应反方。

- 回应必须先引用反方原话再作答。被你概括过一遍的质疑很容易变成稻草人，而你不会察觉。
- Round 1 主动写出方案的已知局限。辩护方的本能是藏起来，但藏起来的那条正是反方会打的点。
- 对高风险质疑只有两条出路：给出实质反驳，或改方案。"概率很低"不是回应。

MIT license, from CronusL-1141/AI-company at commit 01ae582d0d38.

Security

Scanned Oct 21, 2026 at commit 01ae582d0d38, with Cisco's open-source skill-scanner.

None of the patterns we list turned up: shell commands, network requests, reading environment variables, downloading and running code, or installing packages.

A scan lists patterns in the code. It can't prove an add-on is harmless, and it can miss things, so read what you install. How we scan

Alternatives

Other makers' add-ons that do the same job, next to this one.