{
  "schema_version": 2,
  "kind": "shortening-method",
  "format": "agent-skill",
  "id": "argument-map",
  "name": "Argument map",
  "category": "Writing",
  "summary": "Compress a case into its claim, support, assumptions, and objections.",
  "use_cases": [
    "Debate notes",
    "Proposal arguments",
    "Reasoning review"
  ],
  "word_count": 148,
  "url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/",
  "instructions_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/SKILL.md",
  "skill_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/SKILL.md",
  "json_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/llms.txt",
  "plain_text_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/prompt.txt",
  "license": "MIT",
  "sources_url": "https://sho.rten.it/sources/#argument-map",
  "skill_name": "argument-map",
  "skill_description": "Compress a case into its claim, support, assumptions, and objections. Use for Debate notes, Proposal arguments, Reasoning review.",
  "agents_md_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/argument-map/AGENTS.md",
  "sources": [],
  "instructions": "Condense the supplied argument into a small map of its reasoning. State the main claim, then group the reasons and evidence that support it. Keep an assumption separate from evidence. Include the strongest supplied objection and any supplied response or unresolved limit.\n\nShow relationships explicitly: which reason supports which claim, and which objection challenges it. Combine repeated reasons but keep independent evidence distinct. Preserve attribution, uncertainty, exceptions, and the scope of each claim. If the argument depends on an unstated assumption that you must mention to make the relationship clear, label it as an inferred assumption; do not present it as the author's statement.\n\nRemove persuasion, rhetorical questions, anecdotes that duplicate evidence, and repeated conclusions. Do not improve a weak argument by inventing support or turn a contested premise into a fact. Use compact labeled bullets. Return only the map, without scoring or endorsing the argument unless requested.",
  "example": {
    "context": "Map of a disputed library-hours proposal",
    "before": "Nadia proposes a three-month trial of Tuesday evening library hours. She argues that it could help residents who work during the day. In the visitor survey, 42 of 60 respondents said they preferred Tuesday evenings. Nadia notes that the survey was optional and may not represent all residents. Omar objects that the library cannot add staff hours within its current budget. Nadia suggests moving two Friday morning hours to Tuesday evening, but accepts that this could reduce access for Friday users. No vote has been taken.",
    "after": "- Claim — Nadia: Trial Tuesday evening hours for three months to help daytime workers.\n- Support: 42/60 survey respondents preferred Tuesday evenings; the optional survey may not represent residents.\n- Objection — Omar: The budget cannot cover extra staff hours.\n- Response — Nadia: Move two Friday morning hours to Tuesday evening; Friday access may suffer.\n- Status: No vote taken.",
    "must_preserve": [
      "Three-month proposal, no decision",
      "42 of 60 and optional-survey limitation",
      "Budget objection attributed to Omar",
      "Two-hour shift is proposed by Nadia",
      "Trade-off for Friday users"
    ],
    "omitted": [
      "Removes dialogue framing while preserving each supporting and opposing relationship."
    ],
    "kind": "illustrative"
  }
}