Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-debatenpx skills add KevinZai/commander --skill ccc-debategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KevinZai/commanderWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-debate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-debate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-debate.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00040 | $0.01997 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00999 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00399 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00200 |
Grade A, and why
ccc-debate scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
$ccc-debate — Adversarial Multi-Agent Debate (Antfooding)
Debate mode pits N agents against each other on a single design, plan, or diff. Each argues from a distinct lens (security, performance, maintainability, product, contrarian), critiques the others' positions, and the strongest objections survive. A judge synthesizes a single ruled verdict. This is antfooding — you stress-test your own work by adversarially eating it before reality does.
CC Commander · Debate Mode · Docs
Debate is the dialectic expression of the canonical workflow-first doctrine (
commander/cowork-plugin/rules/workflow-first.md): delegate the arguing, keep the ruling. Built on the Workflow tool +dialectic-review+$ccc-fleetmode: "debate".
What debate is
$ccc-debate runs a structured adversarial loop:
- Fan out lenses — Claude spawns one agent per lens via the Workflow tool. Each independently reads the target and produces its strongest argument + objections.
- Cross-examine — agents critique each other's positions. Weak claims get torn down; survivors are the real issues. (Adversarial verification per workflow-first §1.)
- Iterate until resolved — rounds repeat until no new material objection survives, or a round cap is hit.
- Synthesize — a judge agent rules: blocking issues, accepted tradeoffs, and a 🟢/🟡/🔴 verdict — conclusions only, no raw transcript dumped into your context.
You keep the deciding. The agents do the arguing.
When to use debate
Use for:
- Expensive-to-reverse design or architecture decisions
- A diff or PR where silent flaws would be costly (auth, billing, migrations)
- Plans worth stress-testing from FOR / AGAINST / Referee angles before committing
- "Am I missing something?" gut-checks on a spec you're about to lock
Skip for:
- Routine edits, single-file fixes, or anything with an obvious answer
- Work where speed beats rigor — debate spends multiple agent passes
- Cases where you have no clear target (no design doc, no diff) to argue about
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 4d ago First seen · 173 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 554c82fd6864
ccc-debate is a skill published in the GitHub repository KevinZai/commander (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 1,997 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
claude-code-session-broker
Use when running Arcgentic V2 in Claude Code and fixed Planner, Developer, and Auditor role sessions must be coordinated through a broker.
verify-gates
Runs the mechanical quality gates that the arcgentic state machine requires for state transitions. Invoked indirectly by transition.sh OR directly by orchestrator agent before declaring a state transition. Use when about to call transition.sh OR when manually verifying that a round artifact meets the gate criteria.…
agency-roster
Use when a round references agency-agents catalogs, role-family routing, multi-agent identity prompts, or English/Chinese specialist role catalogs.
cross-session-handoff
Read, write, snapshot, and lock .arcgentic/state.yaml across planner, dev, audit, and optional test sessions.
hook-template
Generate hook script from template. Use when adding a new hook, wiring a PreToolUse/PostToolUse/Stop/Notification hook, or scaffolding hook config for settings.json.
check-environment
Verify Claude, Codex, and Grok availability plus Director guidance, relay, agents, and skills. Audit optional hooks only when selected. Use after installation or when a native surface misbehaves.