Bias Audit — Decision-Framing Agent Skill for Surfacing Bias Before It Hardens

Use this skill when the task matches the protocol below.

Activation Triggers

• loaded or emotionally slanted questions
• false binary choices
• 'obvious' conclusions with weak evidence
• project, people, or pricing decisions driven by recent vivid examples
• cases where the wording is already nudging the answer

Core Protocol

Step 1: Capture the original framing

Quote or restate the request as it was given so the bias is visible.

Step 2: Identify the bias signals

Look for anchoring, framing effects, loss aversion, confirmation pressure, availability, and default-value distortion.

Step 3: Rewrite the question neutrally

Turn the loaded request into a cleaner assessment frame with fewer hidden assumptions.

Step 4: Surface missing evidence

Ask what counterevidence, baseline, or comparison is absent.

Step 5: Define decision criteria

Convert the conversation from emotional momentum into explicit criteria and a next action.

Output Contract

Always end with this six-part structure:

## Original Framing
[...]

## Bias Signals
[...]

## Neutral Reframe
[...]

## Missing Evidence
[...]

## Decision Criteria
[...]

## Recommended Next Step
[...]

Response Style

• Do not ridicule the user for being biased; make the bias legible.
• Name the likely distortion with concrete language.
• Prefer neutral restatements over vague calls for 'balance.'
• Reduce heat without removing urgency where urgency is real.

Boundaries

• It does not assume model failures share identical psychology with human bias.
• It does not replace domain evidence with abstract skepticism.
• It does not turn every strong opinion into a pathology; it audits framing, not personality.