Challenge

AI Policy Argument Generation Agent

Develop an advanced AI agent system using the Claude Agents SDK to assist in complex policy negotiations, drawing inspiration from the SAG-AFTRA talks regarding an 'AI tax' on synthetic actors. This challenge requires building a system capable of analyzing diverse policy documents, legal texts, and economic data to generate well-reasoned arguments and counter-arguments for specific stakeholders, such as labor unions and production studios. The core of the solution will be a multi-agent workflow orchestrated by the Claude Agents SDK, leveraging Claude 3.5 Sonnet for its robust reasoning and document understanding capabilities. The agents will be tasked with identifying key points of contention, forecasting potential impacts of proposed policies, and synthesizing persuasive rhetoric. Evaluation of the generated arguments will be conducted using Gentrace, focusing on logical coherence, factual accuracy, and persuasive strength. The system will rely on Azure Blob Storage and Azure Cognitive Search for efficient storage and retrieval of relevant policy documents and background information.

Special Purpose AgentsHosted by Vera
Challenge brief

What you are building

The core problem, expected build, and operating context for this challenge.

Develop an advanced AI agent system using the Claude Agents SDK to assist in complex policy negotiations, drawing inspiration from the SAG-AFTRA talks regarding an 'AI tax' on synthetic actors. This challenge requires building a system capable of analyzing diverse policy documents, legal texts, and economic data to generate well-reasoned arguments and counter-arguments for specific stakeholders, such as labor unions and production studios. The core of the solution will be a multi-agent workflow orchestrated by the Claude Agents SDK, leveraging Claude 3.5 Sonnet for its robust reasoning and document understanding capabilities. The agents will be tasked with identifying key points of contention, forecasting potential impacts of proposed policies, and synthesizing persuasive rhetoric. Evaluation of the generated arguments will be conducted using Gentrace, focusing on logical coherence, factual accuracy, and persuasive strength. The system will rely on Azure Blob Storage and Azure Cognitive Search for efficient storage and retrieval of relevant policy documents and background information.

Datasets

Shared data for this challenge

Review public datasets and any private uploads tied to your build.

Loading datasets...
Evaluation rubric

How submissions are scored

These dimensions define what the evaluator checks and which criteria separate a passable run from a strong one.

Dimensions
5 scoring checks
Binary
5 pass or fail dimensions
Ordinal
0 scaled dimensions
Dimension 1

FactualAccuracyCheck

Verifies that generated arguments do not contain factual inaccuracies based on provided documents.

Binary check

This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.

Dimension 2

StakeholderAlignment

Ensures arguments are consistently aligned with the specified stakeholder's interests.

Binary check

This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.

Dimension 3

LogicalCoherence_Score

A score (1-5) representing the logical flow and consistency of the argument. • target: 4 • range: 1-5

Binary check

This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.

Dimension 4

Persuasiveness_Rating

A human-rated score (1-5) for how persuasive the argument is. • target: 4 • range: 1-5

Binary check

This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.

Dimension 5

Completeness_of_Coverage

Percentage of relevant points from documents covered by the argument. • target: 0.8 • range: 0.5-1

Binary check

This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.

Learning goals

What you should walk away with

  • Master the Claude Agents SDK for constructing sophisticated multi-step agentic workflows, incorporating tool use and computer interaction capabilities.

  • Implement advanced document understanding techniques with Claude 3.5 Sonnet to parse complex legal, contractual, and policy texts, extracting key clauses and implications.

  • Design a robust data pipeline utilizing Azure Blob Storage for raw document storage and Azure Cognitive Search for semantic retrieval of relevant information for agents.

  • Develop strategies for generating balanced and persuasive arguments, including identifying pros and cons, potential impacts, and counter-arguments for different stakeholder perspectives.

  • Integrate Gentrace into the agent workflow to evaluate the logical coherence, factual grounding, and rhetorical effectiveness of generated policy arguments.

  • Build tool-use capabilities within Claude Agents SDK to interact with external databases, search engines, and custom analytics functions for comprehensive data gathering.

How this agent runs

Evaluation will focus on the quality, factual accuracy, logical coherence, and persuasive strength of the arguments generated by the agent system for specified policy scenarios. Gentrace will be used to track and scor...

Preview configuration

Challenge input

{"stakeholder": "SAG-AFTRA", "topic": "AI Tax on Synthetic Actors", "documents": [{"title": "string", "content": "string"}]}

Agent execution

The configured agent processes the input under the challenge policy.

Evaluated output

{"argument_text": "string", "key_points": ["string"], "potential_impacts": ["string"]}

Checks for
  • Verifies that generated arguments do not contain factual inaccuracies based on provided documents.
  • Ensures arguments are consistently aligned with the specified stakeholder's interests.
  • A score (1-5) representing the logical flow and consistency of the argument. • target: 4 • range: 1-5
Proof of success
  • LogicalCoherence Score target: 4
  • 2 public reference cases
Runtime evidence
  • Python execution harness
View technical recipe

Configured tools

No tool records are attached.

Evaluation contract

  • FactualAccuracyCheck · Weight 1
  • StakeholderAlignment · Weight 1
  • LogicalCoherence_Score · Weight 1
  • Persuasiveness_Rating · Weight 1
  • Completeness_of_Coverage · Weight 1

Recipe state

This is a preview. The configuration can change before the evaluation recipe is locked.

Run this agent on your dataset and AI stack

Bring your dataset, model providers, and success criteria. We will scope the right managed run for your team.

Scope a managed run
Start from your terminal
$npx -y @versalist/cli start ai-policy-argument-generation-agent

[ok] Wrote CHALLENGE.md

[ok] Wrote .versalist.json

[ok] Wrote eval/examples.json

Requires VERSALIST_API_KEY. Works with any MCP-aware editor.

Docs
Manage API keys
Explore

Find another challenge

Jump to a random challenge when you want a fresh benchmark or a different problem space.

Useful when you want to pressure-test your workflow on a new dataset, new constraints, or a new evaluation rubric.

Frequently Asked Questions about AI Policy Argument Generation Agent