Agent Debate Pattern in Pega + LangGraph: Every Decision, Justified

Enjoyed this article? See more similar articles in :fire::fire::fire: Pega Gen AI Cookbook - Recipes :fire::fire::fire: series

Agent Debate Pattern in Pega + LangGraph: Every Decision, Justified

What Is the Agent Debate Pattern?

In agentic AI, the Agent Debate pattern replaces a single model making a single call with multiple specialised agents that each argue a different perspective. A Judge synthesises their views into a final, reasoned verdict. Applied to Pega, every case that enters Pega comes with a full AI debate attached — three agents, one verdict, complete transparency.


Without Agent Debate

:clipboard: Significant time for resolution Case worker manually analyses the application to reach a decision
:clipboard: Reasoning stays with the individual Decisions are made by a person — rationale is not always documented in the case
:clipboard: Single perspective applied One case worker evaluates the application based on their own judgement and experience
:clipboard: Audit trail begins at Pega Documentation covers the workflow steps, not the reasoning behind the decision
:clipboard: All cases routed to a case worker Every application requires human review regardless of complexity or clarity

With Agent Debate + Pega

:white_check_mark: Three-agent review Advocate, Risk Agent, and Judge each contribute a documented perspective
:white_check_mark: Full debate history stored in Pega All three agent opinions attached to the case as evidence from day one
:white_check_mark: Audit-ready by default Compliance teams can read exactly why the AI recommended what it did
:white_check_mark: Balanced, reasoned decisions Arguments are weighed across multiple perspectives before a verdict is reached
:white_check_mark: Only judge-approved cases reach Pega If the Judge declines, the A2A call is never made — Pega only receives cases that have passed the debate

A borderline application triggers the debate. The Advocate highlights stable employment and repayment history. The Risk Agent flags an elevated DTI ratio. The Judge recommends conditional approval at $60k — DTI drops to 39%, full rationale documented. The user confirms. Pega creates the case with all three arguments attached as evidence.

Demo: Click here

Enjoyed this article? See more similar articles in :fire::fire::fire: Pega Cookbook - Recipes :fire::fire::fire: series

1 Like