Second Opinion — AI That Argues With You

• 

Inspiration

I was sitting with a friend who was stressed about a big work presentation. "What if they ask me something I haven't prepared for?" she kept asking. I realized most AI tools are designed to agree with you — they're yes-men. They tell you what you want to hear, not what you need to hear.

That's when it hit me: what if AI could argue with you? What if it could play devil's advocate and help you prepare for the toughest questions?

I wanted to build something that forces critical thinking — a tool that doesn't just validate your ideas but stress-tests them. So I built Second Opinion.

What it does

Second Opinion is an AI-powered decision-making tool that convenes a panel of three AI agents:

👨‍⚖️ The Advocate — Makes the case for your idea

🤔 The Skeptic — Tears it apart with counter-arguments

⚖️ The Judge — Rules with a confidence score and suggests the cheapest experiment to settle the debate

You type in any question, idea, or decision you're wrestling with. The panel debates it from both sides, and the Judge gives you a final ruling. It's like having a debate team in your pocket.

Use cases:

Preparing for a work presentation

Testing a business idea

Making personal decisions

Practicing critical thinking

How we built it

I built Second Opinion using Lovable, a no-code AI development platform. The core logic is simple but powerful:

User Input — Type any question or idea

Advocate — Prompted to build the strongest case for it

Skeptic — Prompted to find flaws and counter-arguments

Judge — Prompted to weigh both sides and deliver a verdict

The UI is clean and minimal — just a text input and three AI responses. I wanted the focus to be on the conversation, not the interface.

Tech Stack:

Lovable (AI development platform)

LLM for AI responses

HTML/CSS for UI

Challenges we ran into

1. Making the AI voices distinct. The Advocate and Skeptic needed to sound like different personas with different perspectives. I had to carefully craft the prompts to ensure each role had a unique voice and tone.

2. Keeping it simple. It's tempting to add more features, but I wanted to keep the core experience focused and frictionless. Less is more.

3. Balancing the debate. The Skeptic shouldn't be too harsh, and the Advocate shouldn't be too optimistic. Both need to be credible.

Accomplishments that we're proud of

A unique concept — "AI that argues with you" is memorable and immediately understandable

What we learned

What's next for Second Opinion — AI That Argues With You

More personas (Realist, Optimist, Expert)

Customizable panels

Integration with education for critical thinking

A "history" feature to track past debates

Built With

• lovable