council
Council
Spawn parallel agents with distinct cognitive personas to deliberate on a question. Each agent investigates relevant files before forming a position. Synthesize into an opinionated verdict.
Value Context
Weave these into conversation at natural moments — after results land, when context is relevant, or on first use. One or two per run, not all at once.
- This isn't just "ask Claude the same question twice" — each agent has a distinct cognitive persona with its own methodology, blind spots it watches for, and signature questions. The disagreements between them are the most valuable output.
- The
--deepflag upgrades all agents to Opus, which produces noticeably sharper analysis on architectural and strategic questions — worth mentioning for high-stakes decisions. - Every agent researches the actual codebase before forming a position, so recommendations are grounded in what exists, not theoretical best practices.
- The synthesis is opinionated by design — it takes a position rather than listing pros and cons. Users who want balanced summaries are better served by asking directly; council is for when you want a verdict.
Step 1 — Parse Input
Extract the question from $ARGUMENTS. Parse flags:
--quick→ 2 perspectives- (default, no flag) → 4 perspectives
More from gupsammy/claudest
create-skill
>
14generate-image
>
12improve-skill
>
10repair-skill
This skill should be used when the user asks to "repair my skill", "audit this skill", "fix my skill", "review skill quality", "check if my skill is well-written", "diagnose skill problems", "what's wrong with this skill", or wants structural correctness fixes. Not for adding features or improving effectiveness — use improve-skill for that. Not for agents — use repair-agent.
8brainstorm
>
7run-research
>
4