/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,
$ npx -y skills add alonbaron/claude-skills --skill ask-the-council --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/ask-the-council
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
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,
SKILL.md
ask-the-council.SKILL.mdname: ask-the-council
description: >
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.
argument-hint: "[the decision or question] [+ 'deep' for the full panel]"
Ask the Council
A panel of advisors who are required to disagree, then a Chairman who decides. Use for decisions and tradeoffs, not for gathering facts.
Proactive use
If a decision is high-stakes and the options genuinely compete — architecture choice, buy-vs-build, irreversible migration — invoke this without being asked: announce in one line ("Convening the council: <decision>") and proceed. Never ask permission to run the skill.
Process
1. **Frame the decision.** Restate the question, the real options, and the binding constraints. If one missing fact would flip the answer, ask it (max 1–2). Otherwise proceed on stated assumptions. 2. **Seat the council — in parallel.** Spawn advisors with the Agent tool, **all in one message**. Default panel of 4; `deep` seats all 6 and adds a critique round. Each advisor returns: **position · core reasoning · biggest risk they see · confidence (low/med/high)**. 3. **(deep only) Cross-critique.** Show each advisor the others' positions (unattributed) and have them name the single strongest opposing point. 4. **Chairman synthesis (you).** Not an average — a judgment. Output where they converge, where they split and *why*, the decisive tradeoff, and **one recommended path** with its rationale and the main risk to watch.
The seats (mandate + forbidden move = real divergence)
- **Pragmatic Executor** — what ships fastest and safest with current resources.
*Forbidden:* greenfield / ideal-world answers.
- **First-Principles** — reason up from fundamentals and constraints.
*Forbidden:* citing "best practice" or precedent.
- **The Contrarian** — argue against the front-runner.
*Forbidden:* agreeing with the apparent consensus.
- **Long-term Architect** — model-first; what this is at 10× scale and in two
years. *Forbidden:* optimizing for today only.
- **The Adversary** — how this breaks in prod: failure paths, data loss,
security. *Forbidden:* assuming the happy path.
- **The Outsider** *(deep panel)* — an analogy from a different domain.
*Forbidden:* the field's standard framing.
Default 4 = Executor, First-Principles, Long-term Architect, Adversary.
Output
Lead with the **recommendation** (one or two sentences). Then: the key split and the tradeoff that decides it, then any dissent worth keeping. Short — a brief, not a transcript.
Rules
- Advisors must actually diverge; enforce it through the mandates. No
fence-sitting, no five-hedged-options answers.
- The Chairman **commits** to a recommendation — naming the risk is allowed,
refusing to choose is not.
- Separate opinion from fact; flag any claim that should be verified before
acting. The council gives judgment, not ground truth.
When not to use
- Fact-finding — run a research pass; the council opines, it doesn't verify.
- Low-stakes or one-obvious-answer calls — deciding directly is cheaper and
faster than a panel.
- **Reversible in an afternoon** — decide, ship, and revisit if it bites. A
panel costs 4–6 subagents; spend that only where being wrong is expensive to undo (schema, auth model, vendor lock-in, a migration). If you can't name what the wrong choice costs to reverse, don't seat the council.
Hand-offs
- Verdict chosen → `ponytail` the winning option down to its minimal build.
- Verdict changes an architectural fact → `architect` updates
`SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md` before any code.
Done when
The user has a single clear recommendation, understands the strongest case against it, and knows the one risk to watch.
Global rules
Apply on every run — canonical home `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
- **Ground everything.** Only what's given or verified; never invent files, APIs, or facts. Unknown → say "I don't know" or state the assumption.
- **No tokenmaxing.** Lead with the answer; keep an output budget; no filler, no restating the question.
- **Agent discipline.** Read before you edit; small reversible changes; ask when blocked, don't guess; report failures honestly.
- **Commits are the user's alone.** Author = the user; never add an AI co-author or `Co-Authored-By`/credit line, and don't mention AI in commit messages.
Read more
name: ask-the-council description: > 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. argument-hint: "[the decision or question] [+ 'deep' for the full panel]"
Ask the Council
A panel of advisors who are required to disagree, then a Chairman who decides. Use for decisions and tradeoffs, not for gathering facts.
Proactive use
If a decision is high-stakes and the options genuinely compete — architecture choice, buy-vs-build, irreversible migration — invoke this without being asked: announce in one line ("Convening the council: <decision>") and proceed. Never ask permission to run the skill.
Process
1. **Frame the decision.** Restate the question, the real options, and the binding constraints. If one missing fact would flip the answer, ask it (max 1–2). Otherwise proceed on stated assumptions. 2. **Seat the council — in parallel.** Spawn advisors with the Agent tool, **all in one message**. Default panel of 4; `deep` seats all 6 and adds a critique round. Each advisor returns: **position · core reasoning · biggest risk they see · confidence (low/med/high)**. 3. **(deep only) Cross-critique.** Show each advisor the others' positions (unattributed) and have them name the single strongest opposing point. 4. **Chairman synthesis (you).** Not an average — a judgment. Output where they converge, where they split and *why*, the decisive tradeoff, and **one recommended path** with its rationale and the main risk to watch.
The seats (mandate + forbidden move = real divergence)
- **Pragmatic Executor** — what ships fastest and safest with current resources.
*Forbidden:* greenfield / ideal-world answers.
- **First-Principles** — reason up from fundamentals and constraints.
*Forbidden:* citing "best practice" or precedent.
- **The Contrarian** — argue against the front-runner.
*Forbidden:* agreeing with the apparent consensus.
- **Long-term Architect** — model-first; what this is at 10× scale and in two
years. *Forbidden:* optimizing for today only.
- **The Adversary** — how this breaks in prod: failure paths, data loss,
security. *Forbidden:* assuming the happy path.
- **The Outsider** *(deep panel)* — an analogy from a different domain.
*Forbidden:* the field's standard framing.
Default 4 = Executor, First-Principles, Long-term Architect, Adversary.
Output
Lead with the **recommendation** (one or two sentences). Then: the key split and the tradeoff that decides it, then any dissent worth keeping. Short — a brief, not a transcript.
Rules
- Advisors must actually diverge; enforce it through the mandates. No
fence-sitting, no five-hedged-options answers.
- The Chairman **commits** to a recommendation — naming the risk is allowed,
refusing to choose is not.
- Separate opinion from fact; flag any claim that should be verified before
acting. The council gives judgment, not ground truth.
When not to use
- Fact-finding — run a research pass; the council opines, it doesn't verify.
- Low-stakes or one-obvious-answer calls — deciding directly is cheaper and
faster than a panel.
- **Reversible in an afternoon** — decide, ship, and revisit if it bites. A
panel costs 4–6 subagents; spend that only where being wrong is expensive to undo (schema, auth model, vendor lock-in, a migration). If you can't name what the wrong choice costs to reverse, don't seat the council.
Hand-offs
- Verdict chosen → `ponytail` the winning option down to its minimal build.
- Verdict changes an architectural fact → `architect` updates
`SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md` before any code.
Done when
The user has a single clear recommendation, understands the strongest case against it, and knows the one risk to watch.
Global rules
Apply on every run — canonical home `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
- **Ground everything.** Only what's given or verified; never invent files, APIs, or facts. Unknown → say "I don't know" or state the assumption.
- **No tokenmaxing.** Lead with the answer; keep an output budget; no filler, no restating the question.
- **Agent discipline.** Read before you edit; small reversible changes; ask when blocked, don't guess; report failures honestly.
- **Commits are the user's alone.** Author = the user; never add an AI co-author or `Co-Authored-By`/credit line, and don't mention AI in commit messages.
Six Claude Code skills (architect, review-swarm, ask-the-council, prompt-generator, up-to-date, ponytail) bundled as an installable plugin.
Other skills on alon-skills.
- /architect
Produces Alon's design-doc system BEFORE code: SOURCE_OF_TRUTH, ARCHITECTURE_ROADMAP, TODO_WORKFLOW, CLAUDE.md (+ modular docs/architecture). Model first: data + invariants → core enforcement → failure paths → API contracts → phased workstream. Use proactively when a new app,
Open skill - /ponytail
Forces the laziest solution that actually works — YAGNI, reuse before new code, stdlib before custom, native platform before dependencies, one line before fifty. Levels: lite/full/ultra. Use proactively when a solution is growing beyond the minimum: new abstractions,
Open skill - /prompt-generator
Turns a vague ask into a rigorous, grounded, token-efficient prompt: role + objective, testable done criteria, anti-hallucination (verify or say "I don't know"), anti-tokenmaxing (lead with the answer, output budget), strict agent discipline. Use proactively when the user hands
Open skill - /review-swarm
Local, free, multi-specialist review of a diff: parallel Claude subagents (correctness, security/trust boundaries, data/perf, architecture-altitude, ponytail-simplicity, tests/failure paths), adversarial verification, dedup, ranked file:line report. Use proactively when asked to
Open skill - /up-to-date
Preflight sync + situational brief before repo work: fetch origin, ahead/behind divergence, recent commits, open PRs/issues, dirty-state warnings, one recommended first action. Read-only — never pulls or rewrites a dirty tree without explicit OK. Use proactively before starting
Open skill

