argumentation-engine

argumentation-engine is a skill for Claude Code from muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills. It costs 0 tokens per session (3,061 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A tool for building and examining academic arguments, meaning structured claims supported by evidence and reasoning.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to construct arguments, evaluate evidence, answer opposing views, identify logical fallacies, and choose a suitable argument structure.
Why use it?
It helps reveal weak links between evidence and conclusions, missing counterarguments, and reasoning errors.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the academic-writer plugin — 27 skills shipped together

Good fit Use it to construct arguments, evaluate evidence, answer opposing views, identify logical fallacies, and choose a suitable argument structure.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills --skill argumentation-engine
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install academic-writer, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 27 skills.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for argumentation-engine

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for argumentation-engine

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/argumentation-engine.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 0 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,061 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00000 $0.03061
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.01530
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00612
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00306

Measured 10d ago against content hash 7c3ad8e743de, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

argumentation-engine 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 10d 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.

skills/argumentation-engine/SKILL.md · 252 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 252 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Argumentation Engine

Academic argumentation is not rhetoric — it is the structured, evidence-based demonstration that a claim is well-founded. The choice of argumentation model shapes the structure, tone, and persuasive strategy of the entire paper.


Three Dominant Argumentation Models

Model Primary Purpose Best Used When Audience
Classical (Aristotelian) Persuade toward one correct answer Clear dichotomy exists; issue has a right/wrong Neutral or open-minded
Toulmin Analyse and justify the logic connecting evidence to claim Complex, nuanced debates; policy, science, ethics Expert / Academic
Rogerian Build consensus; find common ground Highly polarised, emotionally charged topics Hostile or defensive

1. The Classical (Aristotelian) Model

The oldest and most universally recognised structure. Works best for issues with a clear correct answer or where one side is clearly stronger.

Structure

  1. Introduction (Exordium): Hook the reader + provide background + state the thesis clearly
  2. Narration (Narratio): Provide the factual context the reader needs to understand the debate and its stakes
  3. Confirmation (Confirmatio): Core body — logical points supported directly by evidence, presented from strongest to weakest (or weakest to strongest)
  4. Refutation (Refutatio): Anticipate and systematically dismantle the strongest counterarguments
  5. Conclusion (Peroratio): Restate thesis (reworded) + reinforce the position + call to action or broader implication

The Three Aristotelian Appeals

  • Logos — Appeal to logic and evidence (most important in academic writing)
  • Ethos — Appeal to credibility and authority (citing established scholars, demonstrating expertise)
  • Pathos — Appeal to emotion (used sparingly in academic writing; more prominent in policy or advocacy writing)

2. The Toulmin Model

Developed by philosopher Stephen Toulmin. The most analytically rigorous model — it makes explicit the logical chain that connects evidence to conclusion. Ideal for academic papers where assumptions must be surfaced and justified.

Read the full file on GitHub · 252 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 10d ago First seen · 252 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 7c3ad8e743de

Subscribe to this mod's changes

argumentation-engine is a skill published in the GitHub repository muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills (6 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,061 tokens. 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

thesis-control

Use when AI-assisted thesis or manuscript edits risk claim drift, scope creep, loss of intended use, experiment-role promotion, or repeated revisions that fail to converge; provides author-intent control, lightweight or strict contracts, drift audits, revision escalation, and human gates.

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 57 tokens

argument-governance

Build and audit the manuscript or research-project argument system across intended use, gaps, claims, data, results, experiment roles, contributions, innovation evidence, limitations, and contribution focus. Use when a paper, thesis chapter, review article, or research project needs an explicit argument map…

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 143 tokens

manuscript-reframe

Reframe report-like academic drafts into paper-form scientific arguments while preserving or explicitly renegotiating author intent; requires an approved old-versus-proposed spine, evidence and argument baselines, analysis-role control, and post-edit drift review.

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 53 tokens

audit

Check thesis chapters for consistency before submission — contradictory numbers, terminology drift, and broken cross-references.

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 22 tokens

release-governance

Use when preparing, auditing, releasing, PDF-hardening, or rebuttal-hardening academic manuscripts, datasets, artifacts, reviewer packets, or claim registers involving multiple refs, local assets, human labels, agent-assisted drafts, wide tables, figure provenance, submission PDFs, or evidence-boundary checks.

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 64 tokens

self-review

Review the user's own manuscript, paper, thesis chapter, rebuttal, or release packet with clean-room anti-contamination controls and, when needed, an unfamiliar-reader comprehension gate. Use for internal review, readiness checks, reviewer simulation, or claim-evidence self-audit where prior chat memory and unstated…

yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit · 69 tokens