Web Artifacts Builder
anthropics/skills
Builds multi-component claude.ai HTML artifacts as a small React, TypeScript and Tailwind project, then bundles it into one shareable HTML file.
A skill your agent uses when a design direction is uncertain, when the team could go multiple ways, or when the user wants to see competing approaches argued before committing — orchestrates…
Install Design Debate
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debate --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .claude/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .claude/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debateType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debate --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .agents/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .agents/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debate --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .cursor/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .cursor/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git --path skills/design-debate--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debate --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .gemini/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .gemini/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debateInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .github/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .github/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install Owl-Listener/designpowers design-debate --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/design-debate .opencode/skills/design-debate && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "design-debate" agent skill from https://github.com/Owl-Listener/designpowers/tree/main/skills/design-debate into .opencode/skills/design-debate/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "design-debate", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
design-debate- GitHub stars
- 251
- Token cost
- ~2.1k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 740 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 33
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when a design direction is uncertain, when the team could go multiple ways, or when the user wants to see competing approaches argued before committing — orchestrates…
- Works in 7 steps: Frame the Question → Assign Advocates → Run the Debate → …
- A design direction is uncertain
- SKILL.md covers When to Use, Do Not Use When, Process and Debate Depth, plus 2 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Design Debate is an agent skill from Owl-Listener/designpowers. Use when a design direction is uncertain, when the team could go multiple ways, or when the user wants to see competing approaches argued before committing — orchestrates structured debate between agents who advocate for different directions
Its SKILL.md is about 2.1k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Frontend & Design. The repository describes itself as: An agent design team you control: 10 agents that run an inclusive design process while you direct. The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- A design direction is uncertain
- The team could go multiple ways
Example prompts
- “/design-debate”
Workflow steps
7 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit cb00757. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are markdown).
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Design Debate loads about 2.1k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 64 tokens; SKILL.md has 740 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from Owl-Listener/designpowers at commit cb00757, republished under its MIT licence (© Owl-Listener). 740 words, ~2,083 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/design-debate/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- design-debate
- description
- Use when a design direction is uncertain, when the team could go multiple ways, or when the user wants to see competing approaches argued before committing — orchestrates structured debate between agents who advocate for different directions
Design Debate
Good design decisions come from tension, not consensus. When agents converge too quickly, they optimise for agreement instead of the best answer. This skill creates productive conflict — agents argue for competing directions with real trade-offs, and the user decides.
When to Use
- When the design-strategist identifies multiple viable directions
- When the design-lead proposes a visual direction and alternatives exist
- When the user says "I'm not sure which way to go" or "what are my options?"
- When the design-critic recommends "rethink" — a debate can surface the better path
- When a decision has significant downstream consequences (navigation pattern, layout model, interaction paradigm)
- When the user explicitly asks for a debate: "debate this", "argue both sides", "what are the trade-offs?"
Do Not Use When
- The decision is trivial (icon choice, exact padding value)
- Accessibility requirements dictate the answer — there is nothing to debate
- The user has already made up their mind — respect their direction
- The brief clearly specifies the approach — follow it
Process
Step 1: Frame the Question
Define the design question precisely. A debate without a clear question produces noise.
Format:
DESIGN QUESTION: [Specific, answerable question]
CONTEXT: [Brief context from design-state.md]
CONSTRAINTS: [Non-negotiable requirements from brief, accessibility, taste profile]
STAKES: [Why this decision matters — what it affects downstream]Example:
DESIGN QUESTION: Should the onboarding flow use a multi-step wizard or a single scrollable page?
CONTEXT: App for first-time pet owners, ages 25-45. Primary persona has mild anxiety about "doing it right."
CONSTRAINTS: Must be completable in under 3 minutes. Must work on mobile. Must not require account creation upfront.
STAKES: Sets the interaction pattern for all future multi-step flows in the app.Step 2: Assign Advocates
Select 2-3 agents to argue for different directions. Each agent argues FOR their assigned position — they are advocates, not neutral analysts.
| Role | What They Argue |
|---|---|
| Advocate A | The case for Direction A — strengths, evidence, personas it serves best |
| Advocate B | The case for Direction B — strengths, evidence, personas it serves best |
| Advocate C (optional) | A third direction, a hybrid, or a "neither — here's why" position |
Assign agents based on their expertise:
| Agent | Best suited to advocate for |
|---|---|
| design-strategist | UX patterns, information architecture, user flow approaches |
| design-lead | Visual directions, layout models, component architecture |
| content-writer | Content strategy approaches, tone directions, naming conventions |
| motion-designer | Interaction paradigms, feedback models, transition approaches |
| accessibility-reviewer | The most inclusive option, cognitive load implications |
| design-scout | Evidence-backed positions from competitive research |
Step 3: Run the Debate
Each advocate delivers their argument in this format:
## [Agent Name] argues for: [Direction]
### The Case
[2-3 paragraphs making the strongest possible argument for this direction.
Be specific — reference the brief, personas, principles, and evidence.]
### Who This Serves Best
[Which personas benefit most and why]
### Who This Serves Least
[Which personas might struggle and why — be honest]
### Trade-Offs
[What you give up by choosing this direction]
### Evidence
[Research, patterns, competitive examples, or design principles that support this]Rules for advocates:
- Argue to win — make the strongest case you can. Do not hedge
- Be honest about weaknesses — a strong argument acknowledges its trade-offs
- Reference the brief — ground arguments in the project's actual goals
- Reference personas — every argument must address who it helps and who it doesn't
- No straw men — do not weaken the opposing position to make yours look better
Step 4: Cross-Examination
After all advocates present, each gets one round of rebuttal:
### [Agent Name] responds to [Other Agent]:
[1-2 paragraphs directly addressing the strongest point of the opposing argument.
Concede what is true. Challenge what is weak.]This prevents echo-chamber advocacy — each agent must engage with the other side's best arguments.
Step 5: Accessibility Check
Before presenting to the user, the accessibility-reviewer evaluates all proposed directions:
## Accessibility Assessment
| Direction | Accessibility Impact | Concern Level |
|-----------|---------------------|---------------|
| Direction A | [Assessment] | Low / Medium / High |
| Direction B | [Assessment] | Low / Medium / High |
[If any direction creates accessibility barriers, flag it clearly.
This is not an argument for a direction — it is a constraint check.]If a direction has High accessibility concern, it should be flagged prominently in the presentation to the user. The user can still choose it, but they should know the cost.
Show full SKILL.md (281 more words)Show less
Step 6: Present to User
Show the debate to the user in a structured format:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
DESIGN DEBATE
Question: [The design question]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
DIRECTION A: [Name]
Argued by: [agent]
[2-3 sentence summary of the case]
Best for: [personas]
Trade-off: [key trade-off]
DIRECTION B: [Name]
Argued by: [agent]
[2-3 sentence summary of the case]
Best for: [personas]
Trade-off: [key trade-off]
[DIRECTION C if applicable]
ACCESSIBILITY: [One-line summary of any concerns]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
YOUR CALL: Which direction do you want to take?
(You can also ask for more detail on any direction,
or propose a hybrid.)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━Step 7: Record the Decision
After the user decides:
- Record the chosen direction in
design-state.mdDecisions Log with rationale - Record the rejected directions and why — this is valuable context for future debates
- If the decision reveals a taste preference, update
design-memory - Dispatch the appropriate agent to execute the chosen direction
Debate Depth
Not every debate needs the full process. Scale the depth to the stakes:
| Stakes | Debate Format |
|---|---|
| High (sets architectural pattern) | Full debate: 2-3 advocates, cross-examination, accessibility review |
| Medium (affects multiple screens) | Quick debate: 2 advocates, no cross-examination, accessibility flag |
| Low (affects one component) | Micro debate: 2 options presented as a simple comparison table, user picks |
Integration
- Called by:
design-strategy,using-designpowers(when user requests debate),designpowers-critique(when "rethink" is recommended) - Calls: Any agent as advocate,
accessibility-reviewerfor constraint check - Updates:
design-statewith decision and rejected alternatives - Informs:
design-memorywith taste signals from the user's choice - Pairs with:
design-strategy,design-memory,taste-feedback
Anti-Patterns
| Pattern | Why It Fails |
|---|---|
| Debating after the user has decided | Wastes time. If the user has a direction, execute it |
| Debating trivial decisions | 8px vs 12px padding is not a debate — it's a design system decision |
| Agents being polite instead of advocating | "Both options are great!" is not a debate. Agents must argue to win |
| Presenting a debate without accessibility review | Every direction must be evaluated for inclusion before the user chooses |
| Running a debate in auto mode without pausing | Debates ALWAYS pause for user decision — they are inherently direct-mode moments |
| More than 3 directions | Too many options cause decision paralysis. If there are more than 3, narrow down first |
© Owl-Listener, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in skills/design-debate of Owl-Listener/designpowers.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit cb00757
Compare with similar skills
Design Debate next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Design Debate this skillOwl-Listener/designpowers | 251 | — | ~2.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Web Artifacts Builderanthropics/skills | 180k | 40 repos | ~769 | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| React Doctormakeplane/plane | 61k | 12 repos | ~657 | Automated safety check: Pass | AGPL-3.0 | |
| Impeccablebestofjs/bestofjs | 3.1k | 26 repos | ~2.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Figma Design System Builderwarpdotdev/warp | 65k | 2 repos | ~4.4k | Automated safety check: Pass | AGPL-3.0 | |
| Web Interface Guidelines Reviewervercel-labs/openreview | 1.7k | 97 repos | ~308 | Automated safety check: Pass | None |
Similar skills
- Official
React Doctor
makeplane/plane
Scans React code for lint, accessibility, bundle size and architecture issues, reports a health score and checks that changes do not lower it.
Impeccable
bestofjs/bestofjs
A skill your agent uses when the user wants to design, redesign, shape, critique, audit, polish, clarify, distill, harden, optimize, adapt, animate, colorize, extract, or otherwise improve a…
Figma Design System Builder
warpdotdev/warp
Builds or updates a design system in Figma from a codebase in ordered phases: discovery, variables and tokens, components, theming and documentation, with checkpoints.
- Official
Web Interface Guidelines Reviewer
vercel-labs/openreview
Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my…
Tailwindcss Development
anonaddy/anonaddy
Always invoke when the user's message includes 'tailwind' in any form.
More from Owl-Listener/designpowers
All 33 skills in this repoAdaptive Interfaces
Owl-Listener/designpowers
A skill your agent uses when designing for user preferences — motion sensitivity, contrast needs, colour schemes, text sizing, information density, or any interface behaviour that should adapt to…
Design Debt Tracker
Owl-Listener/designpowers
A skill your agent uses when critique or review produces deferred findings, when checking accumulated design compromises, or when deciding what to address in the next iteration.
Design Discovery
Owl-Listener/designpowers
You MUST use this before any creative or design work — building features, creating components, designing interfaces, modifying user-facing behaviour.
Design Handoff
Owl-Listener/designpowers
A skill your agent uses when design work is complete and needs to be communicated to engineering — creates specifications, documents rationale, accessibility requirements, and interaction details in…
Design Review
Owl-Listener/designpowers
A skill your agent uses when the user wants to evaluate something that ALREADY EXISTS rather than build something new — "review this", "audit this screen", "what's wrong with this page", "is this…
Design State
Owl-Listener/designpowers
A skill your agent uses when any Designpowers agent starts work or completes work — maintains the shared design state file that all agents read from and write to.
Related
Categories
Questions about Design Debate
What does Design Debate do?
A skill your agent uses when a design direction is uncertain, when the team could go multiple ways, or when the user wants to see competing approaches argued before committing — orchestrates…. Design Debate is an agent skill from Owl-Listener/designpowers.
When should I use Design Debate?
Design Debate fits situations like: A design direction is uncertain; the team could go multiple ways.
How do I install Design Debate in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/design-debate in Owl-Listener/designpowers) into .claude/skills/design-debate in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Design Debate in Codex?
Run `npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/design-debate in Owl-Listener/designpowers) into .agents/skills/design-debate in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Design Debate in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add Owl-Listener/designpowers --skill design-debate -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/design-debate, .gemini/skills/design-debate, .github/skills/design-debate and .opencode/skills/design-debate in your project.
What does Design Debate need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Design Debate is instructions for the agent only.
Does Design Debate access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Design Debate safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Design Debate use?
Design Debate is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Design Debate use?
About 2.1k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 8.3k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Design Debate?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Design Debate: Web Artifacts Builder (anthropics/skills, 180k stars), React Doctor (makeplane/plane, 61k stars), Impeccable (bestofjs/bestofjs, 3.1k stars) and Figma Design System Builder (warpdotdev/warp, 65k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Design Debate?
Owl-Listener (a GitHub user) maintains it in Owl-Listener/designpowers, which has 251 GitHub stars. The repository holds 33 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on June 23, 2026.
Source: Owl-Listener/designpowers on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.