Agent skill

ln-913-community-debater

Launches RFC and debate discussions on GitHub. Use when proposing changes that need community input or voting.

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/other/other/ln-913-community-debater-levnikolaevich-claude-code-skills

SKILL.md

Paths: File paths (shared/, references/, ../ln-*) are relative to skills repo root. If not found at CWD, locate this SKILL.md directory and go up one level for repo root. If shared/ is missing, fetch files via WebFetch from https://raw.githubusercontent.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/master/skills/{path}.

ln-913-community-debater

Type: L3 Worker (standalone) Category: 9XX Community Engagement Launches structured debate discussions in GitHub Discussions for decisions that benefit from community input.


Phase 0: GitHub Discovery

MANDATORY READ: Load shared/references/community_github_discovery.md

Execute the discovery protocol. Extract:

  • {owner}/{repo} for URLs and codebase context
  • repo.id for GraphQL mutation
  • categories["Ideas"] for RFC/Proposal discussions
  • categories["Polls"] for Prioritization polls
  • Verify required categories exist

Load strategy: check docs/community_engagement_strategy.md in target project, fallback to shared/references/community_strategy_template.md. Extract Section 3 (Debate Triggers) and Section 1 (Decision Matrix).

MANDATORY READ: Load shared/references/community_discussion_formatting.md MANDATORY READ: Load shared/references/humanizer_checklist.md


Phase 1: Define the Topic

If $ARGUMENTS provided, use as the topic seed. Otherwise, ask the user what they want to debate.

Gather context:

  1. Read strategy Section 3 -- verify this qualifies as a debate
  2. Grep the codebase for files related to the topic
  3. Read relevant SKILL.md files, docs, or shared references
  4. Identify existing patterns that the proposal might change

Phase 2: Classify Debate Type

Type Prefix Category When to use
Maintainer RFC -- design mostly done, seeking validation [RFC] Ideas End of design process, soft announcement
Community RFC -- early stage, genuinely open to alternatives [RFC] Ideas Beginning of design, kickstart discussion
Proposal -- new feature or restructuring [Proposal] Ideas Concrete idea with use case
Workflow Change -- pipeline, task flow, or conventions [RFC] Ideas Affects multiple areas or user workflows
Prioritization -- what to build next, feature ranking [Poll] Polls Multiple options, need community vote

If type is Prioritization, switch to Polls flow (Phase 4).


Phase 3: Compose RFC Discussion

Use the RFC Structure Pattern from discussion_formatting.md (loaded in Phase 0).

Skill-specific additions beyond the shared pattern:

  • Add ## Unresolved Details section after Open Questions — implementation details not yet decided, to be resolved during development
  • Add ## Decision Criteria section — how the decision will be made (metrics, feedback threshold)
  • Minimum 2 alternatives in the Alternatives table

Phase 4: Compose Poll (for Prioritization type)

GitHub Discussions Polls are created via UI only. Instead, compose a reaction-based voting discussion:

## {Topic}

{1-2 sentence context}

**Vote by reacting to the options below** (each option is posted as a separate comment -- use :+1: to vote).

### Context
{Why this decision matters now}

After creating the discussion, post each option as a separate comment for reaction-based voting.


Phase 5: Fact-Check

Before presenting to user, verify every verifiable claim in the draft:

  1. File paths & links -- verify each linked file exists: ls {path}. Remove or fix broken links.
  2. Code references -- verify mentioned functions/patterns exist: grep -r "{name}".
  3. Alternatives accuracy -- re-read source files to confirm the Alternatives table accurately describes tradeoffs. No hallucinated pros/cons.
  4. Names -- verify skill names, directory names, config keys match actual repo state.
  5. Humanizer audit -- run the audit protocol from humanizer_checklist.md. If 3+ AI patterns found, rewrite flagged sections.

Gate: If any check fails, fix the draft before proceeding.


Phase 6: Review and Publish

Present the composed title + body to the user. Wait for explicit approval before publishing.

After approval, publish via GraphQL using discovery context:

bash
gh api graphql -f query='
  mutation($title: String!, $body: String!, $repoId: ID!, $catId: ID!) {
    createDiscussion(input: {
      repositoryId: $repoId,
      categoryId: $catId,
      title: $title,
      body: $body
    }) {
      discussion { url id }
    }
  }
' -f title="TITLE_HERE" -f body="BODY_HERE" -f repoId="{repo.id}" -f catId="{categories.Ideas or categories.Polls}"

For Polls, after creating the discussion, post each option as a comment:

bash
gh api graphql -f query='
  mutation($discussionId: ID!, $body: String!) {
    addDiscussionComment(input: {
      discussionId: $discussionId,
      body: $body
    }) {
      comment { url }
    }
  }
' -f discussionId="DISCUSSION_NODE_ID" -f body="**Option N:** {description}"

Report the discussion URL to the user.


Rules

  • Always present the full composed text for user approval before publishing
  • Never publish without explicit user confirmation
  • Title: descriptive, under 80 chars, prefixed with [RFC], [Proposal], or [Poll]
  • Body: factual, not persuasive -- present options neutrally
  • Include links to relevant code/docs in the repository
  • Set a decision timeline when applicable
  • Minimum 2 alternatives in the Alternatives table
  • Tone: "We're considering X. Here are the tradeoffs. What's your take?"

Definition of Done

  • Topic defined with codebase context gathered
  • Debate type classified (RFC/Proposal/Workflow/Prioritization)
  • RFC or poll composed with minimum 2 alternatives
  • Fact-checked (links, code references, alternatives accuracy, names)
  • Humanizer audit passed (< 3 AI patterns)
  • User approved final draft
  • Published via GraphQL mutation, URL reported

Version: 1.0.0 Last Updated: 2026-03-13

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results