konsilium
SolidCouncil — 5 independent AI perspectives + mutual critique + synthesis (adapted from karpathy/llm-council for Claude Code). For high-stakes decisions where the answer does NOT follow unambiguously from the data — go/no-go before real consequences, critiquing a methodology, choosing between competing approaches, pressure-testing a conclusion you're attached to, designing risk controls. NOT for log/data analysis (the council has no data access) and not for factual lookups. Triggers — "convene the council", "run it past the council", "go/no-go", "pressure-test this".
Install
Quality Score: 80/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- Sanexxxx777
- Repository
- Sanexxxx777/curated-claude-code
- Created
- 1 months ago
- Last Updated
- 3 days ago
- Language
- N/A
- License
- MIT
Integrates with
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
council
Pressure-tests high-stakes engineering decisions through 5 advisors with distinct thinking styles — independent analysis, anonymous peer review, chairman synthesis. Use when the user says "council this", "run the council", "pressure-test", "stress-test", "red team this", or "devil's advocate" on a real engineering trade-off. Distinct from strategic-analysis — adds adversarial peer review for decisions where the user suspects their first instinct is biased.
ask-the-council
Convenes a panel of opinionated advisors (parallel Claude subagents, each with a distinct mandate and a forbidden move so they genuinely diverge), then a Chairman synthesis that COMMITS to one recommendation with explicit tradeoffs. Use proactively for any high-stakes design, architecture, or tradeoff decision where credible options genuinely compete. Also on "ask the council", "the council", "get a panel". Not for fact-finding or decisions with one obvious answer — answer those directly.
council
Gathers N independent, decorrelated perspectives across model families (external CLIs when present, subagents when not) and arbitrates inline. Use when a decision needs genuine debate — not same-model echo — for critique, review, or judge calls. Honest about degradation: never claims 'consensus' from a single model family.