# Debate Protocol

## Structured Phases (replaces open-ended rounds)

Debates run in three explicit phases, not freeform back-and-forth.

### Phase 1: Independent Position Statements

- Each participant reads the input independently
- Each produces a written position statement with reasoning
- **No participant sees others' positions during this phase**
- This prevents framing bias (the Architect doesn't set the frame for everyone else)
- Output: N independent position statements

### Phase 2: Response & Challenge

- All position statements are shared simultaneously
- Each participant responds to the others:
  - Specific agreements (with reasoning, not "sounds good")
  - Specific disagreements (with counter-reasoning)
  - Risks the others missed
- **Min 2, Max 10 response rounds** (each round = full cycle where every participant speaks)
- A "round" is defined as: every active participant has produced one response
- Circular detection: the Gate Reviewer (not the state machine) reviews round summaries and can halt if arguments are repeating

### Phase 3: Synthesis

- One designated synthesizer (usually the Software Architect for Planning 1, the lead Language Specialist for Planning 2)
- Produces the output document (ADR, implementation spec, etc.)
- **Must include:**
  - Chosen approach with reasoning
  - Rejected alternatives with reasoning
  - All dissents (attributed to the dissenting role)
  - Risk register
  - Confidence level (HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW)
- Other participants review the synthesis for accuracy
- If a participant's dissent is misrepresented → one correction round

## Cross-Cutting Agents (present in EVERY debate)

Two agents participate in every debate at every level — Board, Planning 1, Planning 2, Planning 3:

- **Contrarian**: Deliberately argues the opposing position. Challenges assumptions. Finds failure modes. Prevents groupthink. If everyone agrees, the Contrarian's job is to explain why they shouldn't.
- **Moonshot**: Pushes boundaries. Proposes the ambitious version. Connects to the bigger vision. Prevents mediocrity. Always presents two versions: the moonshot AND a pragmatic stepping stone.

These two create productive tension — the Contrarian pulls toward "are we sure?" while the Moonshot pulls toward "what if we aimed higher?" The domain experts sit in the middle, grounding both extremes in technical reality.

## Round Definition

A **round** = one full cycle where every active participant has spoken once.

- 4 participants = 4 messages = 1 round
- This is explicit to prevent confusion about costs

## Round Limits

| Phase   | Min                    | Max                      | Cost (N participants, mixed models) |
| ------- | ---------------------- | ------------------------ | ----------------------------------- |
| Phase 1 | 1 (each speaks once)   | 1                        | N calls                             |
| Phase 2 | 2 rounds               | 10 rounds                | 2N - 10N calls                      |
| Phase 3 | 1 (synthesis + review) | 2 (if correction needed) | N+1 - 2N calls                      |

### Example: Board (6 participants — CEO, CTO, CFO, COO, Contrarian, Moonshot)

| Phase     | Min           | Max           |
| --------- | ------------- | ------------- |
| Phase 1   | 6             | 6             |
| Phase 2   | 12            | 60            |
| Phase 3   | 7             | 12            |
| **Total** | **~25 calls** | **~78 calls** |

### Example: Planning 1 (4 generalists + 2 cross-cutting = 6)

Similar range. Planning 2 may have more specialists = higher N.

Still much tighter than the original 3-30 open rounds.

## Mandatory Behaviors

1. **State your position with reasoning.** "I think X because Y." Not "sounds good."
2. **Challenge other positions.** Every participant must challenge at least one position in Phase 2.
3. **Raise risks others missed.** If you see a problem — you MUST raise it.
4. **Formally dissent if not convinced.** Dissents survive into the output document.
5. **Don't capitulate to move forward.** Hold your position if you believe it's right.

## Prohibited Behaviors

1. **No rubber-stamping.** "Looks good to me" without reasoning is rejected.
2. **No scope creep.** Stay within the brief's boundaries.
3. **No implementation during planning.** Specs, not code.
4. **No deferring to authority.** The Architect's opinion is not automatically correct.

## Circular Detection

The **Gate Reviewer** (AI, Sonnet) — NOT the mechanical state machine — reviews Phase 2 round summaries. If arguments are repeating with no new information for 2+ rounds, the Gate Reviewer can:

1. Halt debate and force Phase 3 synthesis with dissents recorded
2. Escalate to human if the disagreement is fundamental

## Convergence

Any participant can request moving to Phase 3. The state machine polls all participants (structured yes/no). If 2/3 agree → proceed to Phase 3. Otherwise → continue Phase 2 (within max rounds).
