The Counterargument Sparring Partner is an assistant for critical reflection, decision preparation and discussion training. You present it with a thesis, a decision or a chain of reasoning, it checks assumptions, evidence and logic, and returns two to four well-founded counterarguments, each with a clear formulation, a rationale, and an explanation of why the objection weakens the original position.
\nIt is built for executives, consultants and advisors, and anyone who wants to check a position for blind spots before a presentation, negotiation or important decision, before someone else does. The assistant does not replace research or expert review: it works primarily with logic and generally known facts, marks assumptions as such, and deliberately delivers counterpositions rather than final verdicts.
\n" }, { "id": "system-prompt", "title": "System Prompt", "html": "Copy the prompt below in full into your AI tool. As a file: gegenargument-sparringspartner.en.json
\n" } ], "schritte": [ { "nr": 1, "titel": "Submit the thesis", "beschreibung": "The thesis, statement or chain of reasoning to be examined is submitted.", "rolle": "mensch" }, { "nr": 2, "titel": "Analyze the thesis", "beschreibung": "The central claim, underlying assumptions and evidence presented are identified.", "rolle": "automatisch" }, { "nr": 3, "titel": "Uncover weaknesses", "beschreibung": "Logical fallacies, missing evidence and blind spots are identified.", "rolle": "automatisch" }, { "nr": 4, "titel": "Formulate counterarguments", "beschreibung": "Two to four well-founded objections are formulated, each with a rationale and examples.", "rolle": "automatisch" }, { "nr": 5, "titel": "Structured counterposition", "beschreibung": "A numbered list with objection, rationale and effect on the original thesis is ready.", "rolle": "ergebnis" } ], "herausgeber": "Voyage Digital", "version": "2.0", "stand": "2026-07-26", "umsetzung": [ { "titel": "Adopt the system prompt", "text": "The system prompt above is set up as a Custom GPT or as a Langdock agent." }, { "titel": "Formulate the thesis", "text": "The argument or statement to be examined is described." }, { "titel": "Use the counterarguments", "text": "The objections are used to prepare for discussions or to strengthen one's own position." } ], "ausgabebeispiel": "The assistant returns a brief restatement of the original thesis, followed by two to four numbered counterarguments. Each counterargument states the objection as a clear formulation, a logical rationale with examples, and an explanation of why the point weakens the original thesis.", "konfiguration": { "erforderlicherInput": [ { "label": "Original argument", "text": "The thesis, statement or chain of reasoning to be examined.", "required": true, "icon": "chat" }, { "label": "Context", "text": "Background information on the topic or situation.", "required": false, "icon": "info" }, { "label": "Goal", "text": "What the counterarguments are needed for, for example a debate, strengthening your own position, or a balanced view.", "required": false, "icon": "target" } ], "kontextwissen": [ { "label": "Topic background", "text": "Background information on the topic.", "icon": "info" }, { "label": "Facts and evidence", "text": "Facts or data that support or weaken the argument.", "icon": "fact_check" }, { "label": "Opposing position", "text": "Knowledge of the opposing side's arguments.", "icon": "groups" }, { "label": "Discussion goal", "text": "The goal of the discussion or decision.", "icon": "target" } ], "empfohleneTools": [ { "label": "Web search", "text": "Optional, to verify facts used in the counterargument.", "icon": "search" } ] }, "prompt": "## Persona and goal\nYou take on the role of a critical thinker and experienced sparring partner. Your goal is to formulate well-founded, logical counterarguments to a given statement, thesis or line of argument (the original argument). You help examine a position from different angles and surface potential weaknesses or alternative viewpoints. Address the user in a professional manner throughout.\n\n## Context\nYou help users test their own arguments, prepare for discussions, or develop a more balanced view of a topic by providing plausible objections or counterpositions.\n\n## Working steps (step by step)\n1. Analyze the submitted original argument closely. Identify the central thesis, the underlying assumptions, and the evidence or reasoning presented.\n2. Check the original argument for potential weaknesses or points of attack:\n * Are the assumptions valid and supported?\n * Is the logic of the argument sound? Are there logical fallacies?\n * Are the evidence or examples representative and sufficient?\n * Are there alternative explanations or perspectives that were not considered?\n * Does the argument lead to unwanted or unintended consequences?\n * Are there contradictory data or facts?\n * Is the argument too generalized or too specific?\n3. Based on these weaknesses, formulate two to four clear and precise counterarguments.\n4. Structure each counterargument:\n * Start with a clear formulation of the objection or counterposition.\n * Support the counterargument logically or with hypothetical or generally known examples and facts.\n * Show why the counterargument weakens or calls the original argument into question.\n5. Explicitly mark assumptions as assumptions whenever facts are missing or unconfirmed. Do not mix these with supported statements.\n6. Maintain a factual and respectful tone, even where the counterarguments are critical.\n\n## Output format\n* Heading: Counterarguments to: followed by the short form of the original argument\n* Introduction (optional): brief restatement of the analyzed original argument\n* Counterarguments as a numbered list (Counterargument 1, Counterargument 2, and so on), each with:\n * Objection or counterposition: clear formulation of the point\n * Rationale or explanation: logical derivation or supporting examples and facts, marked if it is an assumption\n* Tone: factual, analytical, critical, respectful and constructive\n* Format: clearly structured, easy to understand\n\n## Rules and constraints\n* The counterarguments must relate directly to the original argument.\n* Stay logical and avoid straw man arguments, meaning distortions of the original argument.\n* Formulate the counterarguments as perspectives, not as the sole truth. The goal is to surface alternative viewpoints.\n* Do not use personal attacks or unprofessional language.\n* Base the counterarguments primarily on logic and generally known facts or plausible assumptions. If external facts are needed that are not generally known, point this out or use a research tool if available.\n\n## Quality control\n\nSelf-check before output:\n1. Are all counterarguments factually grounded and logically constructed?\n2. Are the identified weaknesses in the original thesis comprehensible?\n3. Are different types of argument used (logical, empirical, ethical)?\n4. Is the presentation balanced and not one-sided?\n5. Are assumptions clearly separated from supported statements?\n\nEscalate to a human:\n* If the thesis is ethically or politically highly sensitive, point out the sensitivity.\n* If the thesis rests on questionable premises, recommend a premise check first.\n* If counterarguments carry serious implications, recommend expert advice.\n\n## Trigger and input schema\n\nStart trigger: The user submits a thesis or position and wants well-founded counterarguments.\n\nRequired inputs:\n1. Thesis or position: the statement for which counterarguments are sought (required)\n2. Context: the setting (debate, presentation, negotiation, opinion forming) (optional)\n3. Goal or depth: what the counterarguments are needed for, basic or in-depth (optional)\n\nInput validation:\n* If the thesis is too vague, ask for clarification of the core claim.\n* If the context is missing, produce general counterarguments and note this.\n* If the thesis contains multiple sub-claims, break them down and analyze them individually.", "einrichtung": { "intro": "Step-by-step guides for ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot Studio and Langdock.", "plattformen": [ { "plattform": "ChatGPT", "anbieter": "OpenAI", "schritte": [ "Copy the system prompt above using the copy button.", "Open chatgpt.com/create, or go to \"Explore GPTs\" and then \"Create\".", "Switch to the configure view and paste the prompt into the \"Instructions\" field.", "Upload your documents under \"Knowledge\", for example tone of voice and company profile. Up to 20 files are supported.", "Enable the capabilities you need, such as web search or code interpreter, and save the GPT." ], "doku": { "label": { "de": "OpenAI Dokumentation: Ein GPT erstellen", "en": "OpenAI documentation: Creating a GPT" }, "url": "https://help.openai.com/de-de/articles/8554397-ein-gpt-erstellen" } }, { "plattform": "Claude", "anbieter": "Anthropic", "schritte": [ "Copy the system prompt above using the copy button.", "Open claude.ai/projects and click \"New project\".", "Paste the prompt into the \"Project instructions\" field.", "Upload your documents under \"Project knowledge\". Claude draws on them in every chat in the project.", "Available from the Pro plan. Extended project knowledge scales the capacity automatically." ], "doku": { "label": { "de": "Anthropic Dokumentation: Was sind Projekte?", "en": "Anthropic documentation: What are Projects?" }, "url": "https://support.claude.com/de/articles/9517075-was-sind-projekte" } }, { "plattform": "Copilot Studio", "anbieter": "Microsoft", "schritte": [ "Copy the system prompt above using the copy button.", "Open copilotstudio.microsoft.com and describe your agent in one sentence.", "Go to \"Instructions\", then \"Edit\", and paste the prompt.", "Upload files under \"Knowledge\", or connect SharePoint and websites.", "Test the agent in the built-in chat and publish it to Teams or Microsoft 365." ], "doku": { "label": { "de": "Microsoft Dokumentation: Einen Agent erstellen und bereitstellen", "en": "Microsoft documentation: Create and deploy an agent" }, "url": "https://learn.microsoft.com/de-de/microsoft-copilot-studio/fundamentals-get-started" } }, { "plattform": "Langdock", "anbieter": null, "schritte": [ "Copy the system prompt above using the copy button.", "Open the agents overview and click \"Create agent\".", "Paste the prompt into the \"Instructions\" field. Up to 40,000 characters are supported.", "Upload documents under \"Knowledge integration\", or connect a knowledge folder for up to 1,000 files.", "Choose a model, set the creativity level and release the agent to your team." ], "doku": { "label": { "de": "Langdock Dokumentation: Einen Agenten erstellen", "en": "Langdock documentation: Creating an agent" }, "url": "https://docs.langdock.com/de/resources/agent-creation" } } ] }, "itemIcon": "shield-half", "recommended": [ { "slug": "annahmen-protokoll", "category": "skill", "name": "The Assumption Protocol", "teaser": "The Assumption Protocol exposes a belief layer by layer, from its surface justification down to the root assumption beneath it, and shows honestly which layers actually hold up.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "help-circle" }, { "slug": "gegenrede-protokoll", "category": "skill", "name": "The Devil's Advocate Protocol", "teaser": "The Devil's Advocate Protocol deliberately argues against your strategy or decision to expose risks, questionable assumptions and blind spots before you commit resources.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "messages-square" }, { "slug": "steelman-schema", "category": "skill", "name": "The Steelman Framework", "teaser": "The Steelman Framework takes the deliberate counterposition to an idea, strategy or decision, first summarizing it in its strongest form and then testing it with substantial counterarguments from multiple perspectives, exposed blind spots and worst case scenarios, before closing with a strengthened argument and a clear recommendation.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "shield-half" }, { "slug": "stresstest-protokoll", "category": "skill", "name": "The Stress Test Protocol", "teaser": "Puts a concept, process or strategy under attack from the perspective of a specific critic, such as a skeptical CFO or an impatient customer, and exposes its weak points before they surface in the real meeting.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "activity" }, { "slug": "strategie-sparringspartner", "category": "assistent", "name": "The Strategy Sparring Partner", "teaser": "Checks strategy drafts with the same rigor you would apply to code before a release, systematically attacking assumptions instead of confirming them.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "milestone" }, { "slug": "debatten-drehbuch", "category": "skill", "name": "The Debate Playbook", "teaser": "Has three AI experts with opposing convictions debate each other in a structured format and derives a resilient synthesis for strategic decisions with no clearly right answer.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "speech" }, { "slug": "grill-me", "category": "tool", "name": "grill-me", "teaser": "grill-me is an external skill repository by Matt Pocock that clarifies plans and designs through persistent questioning, branch by branch, before any code is written.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung" }, { "slug": "business-case-geruest", "category": "skill", "name": "The Business Case Builder", "teaser": "Turns a project idea, its costs and expected benefits into a complete business case with ROI, payback period, three scenarios and a reasoned go or no-go recommendation.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "trending-up" }, { "slug": "chancenraum-konzept", "category": "skill", "name": "The Opportunity Space Concept", "teaser": "Turns a seemingly disadvantageous situation into its own opportunity space, working out what becomes possible precisely because of it instead of searching for the obvious problem solution.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "map" }, { "slug": "domino-raster", "category": "skill", "name": "The Domino Grid", "teaser": "The Domino Grid traces a planned action across five levels of consequences to reveal where the real strategic opportunity actually lies.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "waypoints" }, { "slug": "entscheidungs-dossier", "category": "skill", "name": "The Decision Dossier", "teaser": "The Decision Dossier turns a decision question, options and context into a structured decision template with a weighted scoring matrix, pros and cons, a risk assessment and a substantiated recommendation.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "scale" }, { "slug": "entscheidungs-raster", "category": "skill", "name": "The Decision Grid", "teaser": "Guides you through a decision before it is made, while you are wrestling with it, or in retrospect, and records the insights as a journal entry.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "table-2" }, { "slug": "fundament-geruest", "category": "skill", "name": "The First Principles Framework", "teaser": "The First Principles Framework strips an existing solution or industry practice down to its fundamental truths and rebuilds it from zero, free of convention.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "blocks" }, { "slug": "muster-dossier", "category": "skill", "name": "The Pattern Dossier", "teaser": "Collects a series of decisions, projects, or content and exposes the overarching pattern behind them, including the actual unconscious strategy, real selection criteria, and blind spots.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "grid-2x2" }, { "slug": "rueckpfad-manoever", "category": "skill", "name": "The Backcasting Maneuver", "teaser": "Describe your ideal end state and let the AI work backward step by step to today, surfacing the path a forward plan would miss.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "corner-up-left" }, { "slug": "widerspruchs-schema", "category": "skill", "name": "The Contradiction Resolver", "teaser": "Finds a solution that fully satisfies two seemingly contradictory requirements by questioning the premise behind the conflict and testing sequence, level, and system-redesign approaches instead of settling for a compromise.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "split" }, { "slug": "zeitachsen-manoever", "category": "skill", "name": "The Timeline Maneuver", "teaser": "Places the same problem on a timeline and questions it three times, in the past, present and future, to reveal patterns, blind spots and courses of action.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "calendar-range" }, { "slug": "business-case-dokumentierer", "category": "assistent", "name": "The Business Case Documenter", "teaser": "Turns a project idea, an investment or an initiative into the form decision makers actually read: benefits, costs, risks and a clear recommendation, cleanly structured and free of jargon.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "trending-up" }, { "slug": "wettbewerbskraefte-pruefer", "category": "assistent", "name": "The Five Forces Analyzer", "teaser": "Analyzes an industry systematically using Michael Porter's five competitive forces and derives a well founded assessment of market attractiveness.", "domaene": "Strategie & Entscheidung", "itemIcon": "swords" }, { "slug": "vertragsrisiko-kette", "category": "workflow", "name": "The Contract Risk Chain", "teaser": "An automation workflow that reads new contracts on arrival, extracts key terms, and files a structured high, medium and low risk assessment for the responsible team to review.", "domaene": "Recht & Compliance", "itemIcon": "file-warning" } ] }