← 返回
开发者工具 中文

Red Team

Adversarial multi-agent debate engine for stress-testing decisions, ideas, and strategies. Orchestrates multiple AI agents with conflicting worldviews (bull,...
用于对决策、想法和策略进行压力测试的对抗性多智能体辩论引擎。它协调多个持冲突世界观的AI智能体(如看涨、看跌等)
retrodigio retrodigio 来源
开发者工具 clawhub v1.0.0 1 版本 99886.9 Key: 无需
★ 1
Stars
📥 863
下载
💾 8
安装
1
版本
#latest

概述

Red Team — Adversarial Debate Engine

Stress-test any decision by having AI agents with conflicting worldviews debate it.

Prerequisites

One of these coding agent CLIs (uses your existing subscription — no API key needed):

  • Claude Code (default): claudenpm i -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code
  • Codex: codexnpm i -g @openai/codex
  • Gemini: gemininpm i -g @google/gemini-cli

No Python dependencies beyond the standard library.

Quick Start

# Basic 3-persona debate (uses Max subscription via claude CLI)
python3 ~/.openclaw/skills/red-team/scripts/red-team.py \
  --question "Should we do X?" \
  --personas "bull,bear,operator"

# Full debate with context and output file
python3 ~/.openclaw/skills/red-team/scripts/red-team.py \
  -q "Should we invest $50k in this deal?" \
  -p "bull,bear,cash-flow,local-realist" \
  -r 3 \
  -c /path/to/deal-data.md \
  -o /tmp/red-team-result.md

# Use a different model
python3 ~/.openclaw/skills/red-team/scripts/red-team.py \
  -q "Should we launch this product?" \
  -p "bull,customer,operator" \
  -m opus

# List all available personas
python3 ~/.openclaw/skills/red-team/scripts/red-team.py --list-personas

How to Use (as OpenClaw Agent)

When the user asks you to "red team" something, "stress test" an idea, play "devil's advocate", or asks "what could go wrong":

  1. Identify the question/decision from the user's message
  2. Choose appropriate personas (default: bull,bear,operator — adjust based on domain)
  3. Run the script and save output
  4. Summarize the key findings to the user, share the full report if requested

Persona selection guide:

  • Investment/financial decisions → bull, bear, cash-flow, economist
  • Product/startup ideas → bull, customer, operator, technologist
  • Legal/compliance questions → regulator, bear, operator
  • Strategy/direction → contrarian, economist, historian, bull
  • General "should we do X?" → bull, bear, operator (good default)

Available Personas

KeyNameWorldview
----------------------
bullThe BullOptimistic, opportunity-focused
bearThe BearRisk-averse, capital preservation
contrarianThe ContrarianOppositional, consensus-challenging
operatorThe OperatorExecution-focused pragmatist
economistThe EconomistMacro trends, opportunity cost
local-realistThe Local RealistGround truth, local specifics
cash-flowThe Cash Flow AnalystIncome, carrying costs, IRR
regulatorThe RegulatorCompliance, legal risk
technologistThe TechnologistAutomation, scalability
customerThe CustomerEnd-user demand, willingness to pay
ethicistThe EthicistMoral implications, stakeholder impact
historianThe HistorianHistorical patterns, precedent

Custom Personas

Create a JSON file:

{
  "my-persona": {
    "name": "The Skeptic",
    "description": "Questions everything, trusts nothing",
    "system": "You are The Skeptic — you question every assumption..."
  }
}

Use with --custom-personas /path/to/file.json. Custom personas merge with built-ins.

CLI Options

FlagDefaultDescription
----------------------------
--question, -qrequiredThe question to debate
--personas, -pbull,bear,operatorComma-separated persona keys
--rounds, -r2Number of critique rounds
--output, -ostdoutOutput file path
--context-file, -cnoneAdditional context file
--custom-personasnoneCustom personas JSON
--model, -msonnetModel alias (sonnet, opus, haiku, gpt-4o, etc.)
--backend, -bclaudeCLI backend: claude, codex, or gemini
--list-personasList personas and exit

Output Structure

The output is a markdown document with:

  1. Initial Proposals — Each agent's independent take
  2. Critique Rounds — Agents critique each other
  3. Refinement — Agents update positions based on critiques
  4. Conviction Scores — Each agent scores all positions (0-100)
  5. Synthesis & Decision Brief — Neutral agent produces:
    • Executive summary
    • Consensus points
    • Key disagreements
    • Risk matrix
    • Conviction score summary
    • Synthesized recommendation
    • Next steps

When to Use

Good for: Important decisions, investment analysis, product strategy, "go/no-go" calls, pre-mortems, challenging groupthink

Not for: Simple factual questions, time-sensitive emergencies, decisions already made, emotional/personal choices

Integration Tips

  • Save output to memory files for future reference
  • Create BEADS tasks from the "Next Steps" section
  • Feed context files from Obsidian or project docs
  • Re-run with different personas for different perspectives
  • Use --rounds 1 for quick takes, --rounds 3 for deep analysis

版本历史

共 1 个版本

  • v1.0.0 当前
    2026-03-30 04:17 安全 安全

安全检测

腾讯云安全 (Keen)

安全,无风险
查看报告

腾讯云安全 (Sanbu)

安全,无风险
查看报告

🔗 相关推荐

ai-agent

Skill Vetter

spclaudehome
AI智能体技能安全预审工具。安装ClawdHub、GitHub等来源技能前,检查风险信号、权限范围及可疑模式。
★ 1,231 📥 268,182
ai-agent

Self-Improving + Proactive Agent

ivangdavila
自我反思+自我批评+自我学习+自组织记忆。智能体评估自身工作、发现错误并持续改进。
★ 1,383 📥 320,876
ai-agent

ontology

oswalpalash
类型化知识图谱,用于结构化智能体记忆与可组合技能。适用于以下场景:创建/查询实体(人物、项目、任务、事件、文档)、关联相关对象、强制执行约束、将多步操作规划为图谱变换,或当技能需要共享状态时。触发关键词包括"记住""我知道关于什么""将X链
★ 722 📥 245,077