# Karpathy Llm Simulator

> Use LLM as a simulator of expert debates and opposing viewpoints instead of getting a single sycophantic answer. Use this skill when the user needs to make an important decision, wants to stress-test an idea, needs devil''s advocate analysis, wants to avoid confirmation bias, or says "argue against this", "what are the counterarguments", "simulate experts", "debate this", "challenge my thinking".…

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-learnprompt-andrej-karpathy-skills-karpathy-llm-simulator`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [LearnPrompt](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/learnprompt)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [AI & ML](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/ai-and-ml)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [LearnPrompt](https://github.com/LearnPrompt)
- **Source:** https://github.com/LearnPrompt/andrej-karpathy-skills/tree/main/karpathy-llm-simulator

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-learnprompt-andrej-karpathy-skills-karpathy-llm-simulator
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# Skill 3: LLM as Simulator（LLM模拟器思维）

> Source: https://x.com/karpathy/status/2037921699824607591 | https://x.com/karpathy/status/2049907410303865030
> "Drafted a blog post → LLM argue the opposite" — 31k likes

## Core Principle

**Don't ask what the LLM thinks. Ask it to simulate what a diverse group of experts would argue.**

LLMs are trained to please. A direct question gets a sycophantic answer. A simulation request gets a distribution of real perspectives — including the uncomfortable ones.

Karpathy's method: write a draft → ask LLM to argue the strongest possible opposite position → synthesize a better view.

## The 4 Simulator Modes

### Mode 1: Expert Debate Panel
Best for: technical decisions, architecture choices, research directions

```
Simulate a structured debate between these 3 expert personas on [TOPIC/DECISION]:

Expert A: [most optimistic / pro position]
Expert B: [most skeptical / con position]  
Expert C: [pragmatic outsider / unexpected angle]

For each expert:
- State their core argument in 3 sentences
- Cite 2 specific examples or data points they'd use
- Identify what they'd say is the FATAL FLAW in the opposing view

After the debate, synthesize: what's the strongest hybrid position that survives all three critiques?

Topic: [YOUR_TOPIC]
My current position: [YOUR_DRAFT_VIEW]
```

### Mode 2: Steel Man the Opposite
Best for: before publishing, before committing to a decision

```
I'm about to [ACTION / PUBLISH / DECIDE]:

[YOUR PLAN OR DRAFT]

Steel man the strongest possible argument AGAINST this. Be merciless.
Don't hedge. Don't say "while this has merit...". 
Argue as if you genuinely believe the opposite and need to convince a skeptical expert.

Then: what would it take to make my original position survive this attack?
```

### Mode 3: Pre-Mortem Simulation
Best for: project planning, product launches, major decisions

```
Imagine it's [DATE 6 MONTHS FROM NOW] and [YOUR PROJECT/PLAN] has failed completely.

Simulate 3 different failure modes — each from a different root cause:
1. Technical failure: what went wrong in the implementation?
2. Strategic failure: what assumption proved wrong?
3. Execution failure: what human/process error occurred?

For each: describe the specific sequence of events that led to failure.

Then: what early warning signals would have been visible by [DATE 1 MONTH FROM NOW]?
```

### Mode 4: Socratic Drill
Best for: testing your own understanding of a concept

```
I believe I understand [CONCEPT]. 

Ask me 5 increasingly hard Socratic questions to test my understanding.
After each answer I give, probe a potential gap or inconsistency.
At the end, grade my understanding on a scale of 1-10 and identify my biggest blind spot.

Start with question 1.
```

## Anti-Sycophancy Patterns

Always add one of these to prevent the LLM from capitulating to your framing:

- `"Do not soften your critique because you think I want to hear it."`
- `"If my position is clearly wrong, say so directly."`
- `"Ignore that I wrote the original draft — evaluate it as an anonymous submission."`
- `"Your job is to find the fatal flaw, not to validate."`

## Decision Framework

```
Before any major decision:
1. Write down your current position (1-2 paragraphs)
2. Run Mode 2 (Steel Man the Opposite)
3. Update your position based on the strongest critique
4. Run Mode 1 (Expert Debate) to get broader perspective
5. Make the decision — now you've genuinely stress-tested it

Total time: 15-20 minutes. Quality of decision: dramatically better.
```

## When NOT to Use This

- For factual lookups (just ask directly)
- For code generation (use agentic engineering instead)
- When you've already decided and need to execute (move forward, don't ruminate)

## Workflow

**属于工作流：反偏见决策（任何重要判断）**

| 位置 | 上游 | 下游 |
|------|------|------|
| 入口 | 用户面临重要决策时直接触发 | `karpathy-understanding-first`（验证自己是否真正理解） |

完整链路：`llm-simulator → understanding-first → system-prompt-learning`

也在月度体检工作流中用于 stress-test 月度结论。

## Prompt Contract

```text
Simulate a structured debate between 3-5 expert personas with conflicting incentives on . Each persona must: state their core argument, cite specific evidence, identify the fatal flaw in opposing views. After the debate, synthesize the strongest hybrid position that survives all critiques. End with: key assumptions I must verify myself.
```

## Verification Checklist

- [ ] 至少有 3 个角色，且利益/立场互相冲突
- [ ] 每个角色都给出了具体论据（不是泛泛而谈）
- [ ] 每个角色都指出了对方的致命缺陷
- [ ] 综合结论经受住了所有角色的攻击
- [ ] 列出了「我必须亲自验证」的假设清单
- [ ] 没有出现讨好用户原始立场的倾向

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [LearnPrompt](https://github.com/LearnPrompt)
- **Source:** [LearnPrompt/andrej-karpathy-skills](https://github.com/LearnPrompt/andrej-karpathy-skills)
- **License:** MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-learnprompt-andrej-karpathy-skills-karpathy-llm-simulator
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/learnprompt
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.