rhetoric

Toulmin argumentation engine — symbolic validation of argument structure, inferential integrity, and audience-calibrated delivery.

Quality

62%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./rhetoric/SKILL.md

Rhetoric: Toulmin Argumentation Engine

"Give me a place to stand, and I will move the world." — Archimedes

Overview

Rhetoric is a symbolic argumentation engine based on Stephen Toulmin's model. It decomposes natural-language arguments into formal graphs (claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, rebuttal), validates inferential steps through four deterministic passes, selects delivery strategy based on audience epistemic state, and optionally generates structural analogies via Mercury.

Commands

`plan "<intent>" [--no-bridge] [--contradict <evidence>...]`

Decompose a natural-language argument into a Toulmin graph, validate it through four passes, select a delivery strategy, and optionally generate a structural analogy via Mercury.

python3 rhetoric/scripts/rhetoric.py plan "PostgreSQL 16 improves performance for most workloads"
python3 rhetoric/scripts/rhetoric.py plan "Rust is best for all backends" --contradict "Compile times are slow" "Python has larger ecosystem"
python3 rhetoric/scripts/rhetoric.py plan "Microservices improve reliability" --no-bridge

Requires: INCEPTION_API_KEY environment variable (Mercury API)

Options:

--no-bridge: Skip analogy bridge generation
--contradict <evidence>...: Known contradicting evidence for cross-reference validation

`validate <file>`

Validate a pre-built Toulmin argument graph from a JSON file. No API needed.

python3 rhetoric/scripts/rhetoric.py validate path/to/graph.json

`demo`

Run built-in demonstration cases showcasing the validation engine. No API needed.

python3 rhetoric/scripts/rhetoric.py demo

Demonstrates detection of: valid induction, hasty generalization, formal fallacies (affirming the consequent), cherry-picking (cross-reference integrity), and surface analogies.

Validation Passes

The engine runs four deterministic validation passes (no LLM calls):

Pass	Name	Detects
1	Structural completeness	Missing claim/data/warrant, absent backing/qualifier/rebuttals
2	Inferential type validation	Formal fallacies, hasty generalization, false cause, surface analogy
3	Cross-reference integrity	Unaddressed contradictions, unused supporting evidence
4	Qualifier calibration	Overclaim/underclaim relative to evidence strength

Required Credentials

INCEPTION_API_KEY=...   # Mercury API — only needed for 'plan' command

The validate and demo commands require no API keys.

Constitution

See constitution.md for 6 inviolable rules governing the argumentation engine.

Synergies

-> Encyclopedia: Provide contradicting/supporting evidence for validation Pass 3
-> Inland Empire: Store significant argument analyses as memories
<- Volition: Complex actions can request argument validation first

Repository: Raudbjorn/cognitive-construct
Path: rhetoric/SKILL.md
Commit: 319f646

Last updated: 6 days ago
First committed: 6 months ago

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.