---
name: evidence-tournament
description: "Tactic: Evidence gathering, cross-examination, and quality judgment. External evidence is collected, presented, challenged, and scored for relevance and reliability."
type: tactic
used-by: [multiagent-debate]
strategies: [courtroom-structured, critic-defender-judge]
---
# Evidence Tournament Tactic
Structured evidence competition — gather, present, cross-examine, and judge evidence quality.
## Orchestration
1. **evidence-scout** searches for evidence supporting the artifact's claims
2. **evidence-scout** searches for evidence opposing the artifact's claims
3. **debate-critic** presents opposing evidence as structured arguments
4. **debate-defender** presents supporting evidence as counter-arguments
5. **cross-examination** probes both evidence sets:
- Source reliability assessment
- Relevance to specific claims
- Recency and applicability
- Potential confounds or alternative interpretations
6. **debate-judge** scores each piece of evidence and produces tournament bracket result
## Evidence Quality Criteria
- **Relevance**: Direct bearing on the claim (0.0–1.0)
- **Reliability**: Source credibility and methodology (0.0–1.0)
- **Recency**: Temporal applicability (0.0–1.0)
- **Specificity**: How precisely it addresses the claim (0.0–1.0)
## Subagents Dispatched
- evidence-scout × 2 (pro and con evidence gathering)
- debate-critic (opposing evidence presentation)
- debate-defender (supporting evidence presentation)
- cross-examination (evidence probing)
- debate-judge (evidence scoring and verdict)
## Termination Conditions
- All claims have been evidenced and cross-examined
- Evidence search budget exhausted (2/5/10 searches)
- No further relevant evidence discoverable
- Judge has scored all evidence pairs