Individual skill
s4h-writing-argument
Builds and repairs persuasive arguments by surfacing the warrant, auditing evidence, addressing counterarguments, and identifying rhetorical substitutes. Use when an argument has holes, the case isn't landing, or evidence isn't connecting to the claim. Triggers: 'build an argument', 'argument structure', 'the argument isn't working', 'op-ed', 'persuasive writing', 'make the case for', 'my argument has holes', 'the evidence doesn't land'.
skills/s4h-writing-argument/SKILL.md
Source commit a30df8b67698ccb03ef5e35d68c2eddc5321ad3f
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Instructions only
- Last checked
- Nov 11, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 241
- Repository last updated
- Jul 15, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- claude-code Repository topic
- claude-code-plugin Repository topic
- cognitive-frameworks Repository topic
- creativity Repository topic
- decision-making Repository topic
- ethics Repository topic
- mental-models Repository topic
- problem-solving Repository topic
- reasoning Repository topic
- systems-thinking Repository topic
- writing Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 8,216 bytes
Read excerpt
# Writing: Argument
Arguments fail not in the evidence but in the warrant — the unstated principle connecting evidence to claim. The warrant is the assumption that makes the argument work. Most writers never surface it, because to them it is obvious. But the reader may be supplying a different warrant — and reaching a different conclusion from the same evidence.
The structure of every argument:
- **Claim:** What you are asserting to be true
- **Evidence:** The facts, data, examples, or observations that support it
- **Warrant:** The principle or assumption that connects the evidence to the claim
Example: "Remote workers are more productive (evidence). Therefore we should adopt a remote work policy (claim)." The warrant — "policies should be adopted when they increase productivity" — sounds obvious but is not. A reader who believes "productivity must be balanced against team cohesion and culture" will not accept the warrant, and the argument fails for them even if the evidence is strong. Making the warrant explicit forces both writer and reader to examine the actual assumption.
The second most common failure: the strongest counterargument is not addressed. An argument that doesn't engage its best objection is not a complete argument — it is a one-sided brief that any reader with reservations can dismiss. Addressing the counterargument, not to concede but to answer it, is what makes an argument persuasive rather than merely insistent.
---