/obsidian-panel

description: Convene a panel of distinct perspectives on a decision - one independent verdict per lens, then a synthesis. A multi-persona complement to /obsidian-challenge
category: thinking
triggers_en: ["convene a panel", "advisor panel", "get multiple perspectives on", "panel review", "what would the experts say about"]
triggers_de: ["ein Expertengremium einberufen", "Beratergremium", "mehrere Perspektiven auf", "Expertenrunde", "was würden die Experten dazu sagen"]
triggers_es: ["convoca un panel", "panel de asesores", "dame varias perspectivas sobre esto", "revisión en panel", "qué dirían los expertos sobre esto"]
triggers_pt: ["convoque um painel", "painel de especialistas", "obtenha múltiplas perspectivas sobre", "revisão em painel", "o que os especialistas diriam sobre"]
triggers_zh: ["找几个不同视角来评审", "让多个专家分析这个决定", "从几个角度评价这个方案", "开个顾问评审会", "不同专家会怎么看"]

Use the obsidian-second-brain skill. Execute `/obsidian-panel [decision or question]`:

Pressure-tests a decision from several independent angles at once. Where `/obsidian-challenge` red-teams from one adversarial stance, this gathers a panel of distinct lenses and makes each argue on its own before you see a synthesis.

1. Resolve the decision/question from the argument. If none, ask what to put to the panel. 2. Choose the panel:

• If the vault has an `Advisors/` folder, read those persona notes and use each as a panelist (each verdict reflects that advisor's stated lens and priorities).
• Otherwise, use 4 generic lenses: the skeptic (what breaks this), the user/customer (who is served or hurt), the operator (can this actually be run/maintained), and the long-game (what does this look like in a year).

3. For EACH panelist, write an independent verdict: their position, the strongest reason behind it, and what would change their mind. Keep them genuinely distinct - do not let them converge prematurely. 4. Write a synthesis: where the panel agreed, where it split, and a recommended decision with its main risk. Do not hide the disagreement - the split is the most useful output. 5. Save to the concepts folder (resolved per `references/folder-map.md` - wiki-style `wiki/concepts/`, Obsidian-style `Ideas/`) as `YYYY-MM-DD - panel - <slug>.md` (`type: synthesis`, tagged `[synthesis, thinking, panel]`), linking any `[[Advisors/...]]` notes and `[[entities/projects]]` the decision touches. Cross-link from today's daily note.

---

**AI-first rule:** Every note created or updated by this command MUST follow `references/ai-first-rules.md` - `## For future agent` preamble, rich frontmatter (`type`, `date`, `tags`, `ai-first: true`, plus type-specific fields), recency markers per external claim, mandatory `[[wikilinks]]` for every person/project/concept referenced, sources preserved verbatim with URLs inline, and confidence levels where applicable. If that path does not resolve from your working directory, search upward for it; if you still cannot read it, say so before writing rather than producing a note that silently skips the rule. The vault is for future agent retrieval - not human reading.

**Anti-fabrication:** If you use `Advisors/` notes, base each verdict on what that note actually says - do not invent an advisor's position or attribute views to a real person they have not expressed. Never fabricate a consensus; report the real split. See the anti-fabrication and search-completeness hard rules in `references/ai-first-rules.md`.

<!-- author-credit -->

---

From [obsidian-second-brain](https://github.com/eugeniughelbur/obsidian-second-brain), created by Eugeniu Ghelbur (AI Automation Engineer, AI Tooling Engineer, AI Educator). Questions or consulting: [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/in/eugeniu-ghelbur/) or [e.ghelbur@gmail.com](mailto:e.ghelbur@gmail.com). More: [The AI Operator](https://theaioperator.io/?utm_source=github&utm_medium=file-credit) | [X](https://x.com/eugeniu_ghelbur) | [GitHub](https://github.com/eugeniughelbur). MIT license.