360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

Multi-Perspective Forum

核心功能:依托5个固定视角的模拟角色(营收现实主义者、构建者等),通过三轮结构化辩论(初始立场、反驳、终判),生成含共识、争议点、可控性评估的结论,规避决策偏见。典型场景:周一杠杆审计、周五周复盘、战略决策、机会评估;触发方式:特定指令或委托技能需二次意见时;输入为业务数据与决策问题,输出结构化辩论结果。

dodge1218
dodge1218
热度 32.19
最近更新 2026-05-11 17:39:22
分类:数据依赖:内部调用大模型应用场景:数据处理 / 报告撰写 / 会议纪要

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add multi-perspective-forum
Metadata
name
agent-forum
version
1.0.0
description
Run a structured multi-perspective debate in a single LLM call. Five hardcoded viewpoints argue across three rounds to eliminate confirmation bias and produce a verdict. Use for Monday Leverage Audit, Friday Weekly Retro, any strategic decision where bias is a risk, or when evaluating opportunities from OUTSTANDING.md. Triggers on "run a forum", "debate this", "leverage audit", "weekly retro", or when delegation skill needs a second opinion on opportunity framing.

Agent Forum

One prompt. Five simulated agents. Three rounds. One verdict. Runs as a single sessions_spawn call (~8-12k tokens).

The 5 Agents

Agent Perspective
Revenue Realist No revenue signal = not working. Show me the money.
Builder Ship more, measure later. Momentum matters.
Skeptic Prove it. What's the null hypothesis? Assumes failure until evidence.
Operator Systems, reliability, cost. What breaks at 10x scale?
Customer Voice Would I open this email? Pay for this? Care about this?

Prompt Template

Inject {DATA} and {QUESTION} into this template:

You are running a strategic forum with 5 agents. Each agent has a hardcoded perspective.
They debate the data in 3 rounds, then produce a joint verdict.

RULES:
- 2-3 sentences per agent per round. No fluff.
- Agents MUST disagree where perspectives conflict.
- Round 3: CONSENSUS, CONTESTED, VERDICT.
- Brutally honest. No cheerleading.
- Total output under 3,000 tokens.

THE 5 AGENTS:
1. Revenue Realist — Only money. No revenue signal = not working.
2. Builder — Ship more, iterate. Momentum > perfection.
3. Skeptic — Prove it. Assumes failure until evidence.
4. Operator — Systems, reliability, cost. What breaks at scale?
5. Customer Voice — Would I buy/open/care about this?

DATA PAYLOAD:
{DATA}

QUESTION:
{QUESTION}

FORMAT:
## Round 1: Initial Positions
## Round 2: Challenges & Rebuttals
## Round 3: Verdict
### Consensus
### Contested
### Verdict
### Controllable Assessment
[Each item: ✅ Controllable / ⚠️ Partial / ❌ Uncontrollable]

Spawn Config

sessions_spawn:
  task: [formatted prompt]
  model: "github-copilot/claude-opus-4.6"
  mode: "run"
  runTimeoutSeconds: 120

Data Collection Before Forum

Leverage Audit (Monday): Resend analytics, lead pipeline counts, revenue/signups, error logs, outreach totals, cron health, cost burn.

Weekly Retro (Friday): Sprint target vs actual, emails sent, leads sourced, revenue events, things shipped/broke, blockers hit.

Cron

  • Monday 9 AM ET: 0 13 * * 1 (leverage audit)
  • Friday 9 AM ET: 0 13 * * 5 (retro)

Use OpenClaw cron (needs LLM access), not crontab.