/council — Multi-Model Consensus Council
Spawn parallel judges with different perspectives, consolidate into consensus. Works for any task — validation, research, brainstorming.
Quick Start
/council
--quick
validate recent
fast inline check
/council validate this plan
validation (2 agents)
/council brainstorm caching approaches
brainstorm
/council validate the implementation
validation (critique triggers map here)
/council research kubernetes upgrade strategies
research
/council research the CI/CD pipeline bottlenecks
research (analyze triggers map here)
/council
--preset
=
security-audit validate the auth system
preset personas
/council
--deep
--explorers
=
3
research upgrade automation
deep + explorers
/council
--debate
validate the auth system
adversarial 2-round review
/council
--deep
--debate
validate the migration plan
thorough + debate
/council
infers from context
Council works independently — no RPI workflow, no ratchet chain, no
ao
CLI required. Zero setup beyond initial install.
Modes
Mode
Agents
Execution Backend
Use Case
--quick
0 (inline)
Self
Fast single-agent check, no spawning
default
2
Runtime-native (Codex sub-agents preferred; Claude teams fallback)
Independent judges (no perspective labels)
--deep
3
Runtime-native
Thorough review
--mixed
3+3
Runtime-native + Codex CLI
Cross-vendor consensus
--debate
2+
Runtime-native
Adversarial refinement (2 rounds)
/council
--quick
validate recent
inline single-agent check, no spawning
/council recent
2 runtime-native judges
/council
--deep
recent
3 runtime-native judges
/council
--mixed
recent
runtime-native + Codex CLI
Spawn Backend (MANDATORY)
Council requires a runtime that can
spawn parallel subagents
and (for
--debate
)
send messages between agents
. Use whatever multi-agent primitives your runtime provides. If no multi-agent capability is detected, fall back to
--quick
(inline single-agent).
Required capabilities:
Spawn subagent
— create a parallel agent with a prompt (required for all modes except
--quick
)
Agent messaging
— send a message to a specific agent (required for
--debate
)
Skills describe WHAT to do, not WHICH tool to call. See
skills/shared/SKILL.md
for the capability contract.
After detecting your backend, read the matching reference for concrete spawn/wait/message/cleanup examples:
Shared Claude feature contract →
skills/shared/references/claude-code-latest-features.md
Local mirrored contract for runtime-local reads →
references/claude-code-latest-features.md
Claude Native Teams →
references/backend-claude-teams.md
Codex Sub-Agents / CLI →
references/backend-codex-subagents.md
Background Tasks →
references/backend-background-tasks.md
Inline (
--quick
) →
references/backend-inline.md
See also
references/cli-spawning.md
for council-specific spawning flow (phases, timeouts, output collection).
When to Use
--debate
Use
--debate
for high-stakes or ambiguous reviews where judges are likely to disagree:
Security audits, architecture decisions, migration plans
Reviews where multiple valid perspectives exist
Cases where a missed finding has real consequences
Skip
--debate
for routine validation where consensus is expected. Debate adds R2 latency (judges stay alive and process a second round via backend messaging).
Incompatibilities:
--quick
and
--debate
cannot be combined.
--quick
runs inline with no spawning;
--debate
requires multi-agent rounds. If both are passed, exit with error: "Error: --quick and --debate are incompatible."
--debate
is only supported with validate mode. Brainstorm and research do not produce PASS/WARN/FAIL verdicts. If combined, exit with error: "Error: --debate is only supported with validate mode."
Task Types
Type
Trigger Words
Perspective Focus
validate
validate, check, review, assess, critique, feedback, improve
Is this correct? What's wrong? What could be better?
brainstorm
brainstorm, explore, options, approaches
What are the alternatives? Pros/cons?
research
research, investigate, deep dive, explore deeply, analyze, examine, evaluate, compare
What can we discover? What are the properties, trade-offs, and structure?
Natural language works — the skill infers task type from your prompt.
First-pass rigor gate for plan/spec validation (MANDATORY)
When mode is
validate
and the target is a plan/spec/contract (or contains boundary rules, state transitions, or conformance tables), judges must apply this gate before returning
PASS
:
Canonical mutation + ack sequence is explicit, single-path, and non-contradictory.
Consume-at-most-once path is crash-safe with explicit atomic boundary and restart recovery semantics.
Status/precedence behavior is defined with a field-level truth table and anomaly reason codes for conflicting evidence.
Conformance includes explicit boundary failpoint tests and deterministic assertions for replay/no-duplicate-effect outcomes.
Verdict policy for this gate:
Missing or contradictory gate item: minimum
WARN
.
Missing deterministic conformance coverage for any gate item: minimum
WARN
.
Critical lifecycle invariant not mechanically verifiable:
FAIL
.
Architecture
Context Budget Rule (CRITICAL)
Judges write ALL analysis to output files. Messages to the lead contain ONLY a
minimal completion signal:
{"type":"verdict","verdict":"...","confidence":"...","file":"..."}
.
The lead reads output files during consolidation. This prevents N judges from
exploding the lead's context window with N full reports via SendMessage.
Consolidation runs inline as the lead
— no separate chairman agent. The lead
reads each judge's output file sequentially with the Read tool and synthesizes.
Execution Flow
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 1: Build Packet (JSON) │
│ - Task type (validate/brainstorm/research) │
│ - Target description │
│ - Context (files, diffs, prior decisions) │
│ - Perspectives to assign │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 1a: Select spawn backend │
│ codex_subagents | claude_teams | background_fallback │
│ Team lead = spawner (this agent) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
┌─────────────────┴─────────────────┐
▼ ▼
┌───────────────────────┐ ┌───────────────────────┐
│ RUNTIME-NATIVE JUDGES│ │ CODEX AGENTS │
│ (spawn_agent or teams)│ │ (Bash tool, parallel)│
│ │ │ Agent 1 (independent │
│ Agent 1 (independent │ │ or with preset) │
│ or with preset) │ │ Agent 2 │
│ Agent 2 │ │ Agent 3 │
│ Agent 3 (--deep only)│ │ (--mixed only) │
│ (--deep/--mixed only)│ │ │
│ │ │ Output: JSON + MD │
│ Write files, then │ │ Files: .agents/ │
│ wait()/SendMessage to │ │ council/codex- │
│ lead │ │ │
│ Files: .agents/ │ └───────────────────────┘
│ council/claude- │ │
└───────────────────────┘ │
│ │
└─────────────────┬─────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 2: Consolidation (Team Lead — inline, no extra agent) │
│ - Receive MINIMAL completion signals (verdict + file path) │
│ - Read each judge's output file with Read tool │
│ - If schema_version is missing from a judge's output, treat │
│ as version 0 (backward compatibility) │
│ - Compute consensus verdict │
│ - Identify shared findings │
│ - Surface disagreements with attribution │
│ - Generate Markdown report for human │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 3: Cleanup │
│ - Cleanup backend resources (close_agent / TeamDelete / none) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Output: Markdown Council Report │
│ - Consensus: PASS/WARN/FAIL │
│ - Shared findings │
│ - Disagreements (if any) │
│ - Recommendations │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Graceful Degradation
Failure
Behavior
1 of N agents times out
Proceed with N-1, note in report
All Codex CLI agents fail
Proceed with runtime-native judges only, note degradation
All agents fail
Return error, suggest retry
Codex CLI not installed
Skip Codex CLI judges, continue with runtime judges only (warn user)
No multi-agent capability
Fall back to
--quick
(inline single-agent review)
No agent messaging
--debate
unavailable, single-round review only
Output dir missing
Create
.agents/council/
automatically
Timeout: 120s per agent (configurable via
--timeout=N
in seconds).
Minimum quorum:
At least 1 agent must respond for a valid council. If 0 agents respond, return error.
Effort Levels for Judges
Use the effort command to optimize token spend per judge role:
Agent Role
Recommended Effort
Rationale
Judges (validate/research)
low
Judges review evidence, not implement — shallow reasoning suffices
Explorers
low
Fast breadth-first scanning
Chairman (consolidation)
medium
Needs balanced reasoning for consensus synthesis
Pre-Flight Checks
Multi-agent capability:
Detect whether runtime supports spawning parallel subagents. If not, degrade to
--quick
.
Agent messaging:
Detect whether runtime supports agent-to-agent messaging. If not, disable
--debate
.
Codex CLI judges (--mixed only):
Check
which codex
, test model availability, test
--output-schema
support. Downgrade mixed mode when unavailable.
Agent count:
Verify
judges * (1 + explorers) <= MAX_AGENTS (12)
Output dir:
mkdir -p .agents/council
Quick Mode (
--quick
)
Single-agent inline validation. No subprocess spawning, no Task tool, no Codex. The current agent performs a structured self-review using the same output schema as a full council.
When to use:
Routine checks, mid-implementation sanity checks, pre-commit quick scan.
Execution:
Gather context (files, diffs) -> perform structured self-review inline using the council output_schema (verdict, confidence, findings, recommendation) -> write report to
.agents/council/YYYY-MM-DD-quick-.md
labeled as
Mode: quick (single-agent)
.
Limitations:
No cross-perspective disagreement, no cross-vendor insights, lower confidence ceiling. Not suitable for security audits or architecture decisions.
Packet Format (JSON)
The packet sent to each agent.
File contents are included inline
— agents receive the actual code/plan text in the packet, not just paths. This ensures both Claude and Codex agents can analyze without needing file access.
If
.agents/ao/environment.json
exists, include it in the context packet so judges can reason about available tools and environment state.
Judge prompt boundary:
Do NOT include
.agents/
references in judge prompts.
Do NOT instruct judges to search
.agents/
directories. Judges operate on the council packet only.
{
"council_packet"
:
{
"version"
:
"1.0"
,
"mode"
:
"validate | brainstorm | research"
,
"target"
:
"Implementation of user authentication system"
,
"context"
:
{
"files"
:
[
{
"path"
:
"src/auth/jwt.py"
,
"content"
:
""
}
,
{
"path"
:
"src/auth/middleware.py"
,
"content"
:
""
}
]
,
"diff"
:
"git diff output if applicable"
,
"spec"
:
{
"source"
:
"bead na-0042 | plan doc | none"
,
"content"
:
"The spec/bead description text (optional — included when wrapper provides it)"
}
,
"prior_decisions"
:
[
"Using JWT, not sessions"
,
"Refresh tokens required"
]
,
"empirical_results"
:
"(optional) test output, CLI flag verification, or Wave 0 findings — include when evaluating feasibility"
}
,
"perspective"
:
"skeptic (only when --preset or --perspectives used)"
,
"perspective_description"
:
"What could go wrong? (only when --preset or --perspectives used)"
,
"output_schema"
:
{
"verdict"
:
"PASS | WARN | FAIL"
,
"confidence"
:
"HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW"
,
"key_insight"
:
"Single sentence summary"
,
"findings"
:
[
{
"severity"
:
"critical | significant | minor"
,
"category"
:
"security | architecture | performance | style"
,
"id"
:
"(optional) Stable finding ID for cross-skill correlation (e.g., f-council-001)"
,
"description"
:
"What was found"
,
"location"
:
"file:line if applicable"
,
"recommendation"
:
"How to address"
,
"fix"
:
"Specific action to resolve this finding"
,
"why"
:
"Root cause or rationale"
,
"ref"
:
"File path, spec anchor, or doc reference"
}
]
,
"recommendation"
:
"Concrete next step"
,
"schema_version"
:
3
}
}
}
Empirical Evidence Rule
When evaluating
implementation feasibility
(e.g., "will this CLI flag work?", "can these tools coexist?"), always include empirical test results in
context.empirical_results
. Judges reasoning from assumptions produce false verdicts — a Codex judge once gave a false FAIL on
-s read-only
because Wave 0 test output was not in the packet. The rule:
run the experiment first, then let judges evaluate the evidence.
Wrapper skills (
/vibe
,
/pre-mortem
) should include relevant test output when the council target involves tooling behavior, flag combinations, or runtime compatibility.
Perspectives
Perspectives & Presets:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/personas.md
for persona definitions, preset configurations, and custom perspective details.
Auto-Escalation:
When
--preset
or
--perspectives
specifies more perspectives than the current judge count, automatically escalate judge count to match. The
--count
flag overrides auto-escalation.
Named Perspectives
Named perspectives assign each judge a specific viewpoint. Pass
--perspectives="a,b,c"
for free-form names, or
--perspectives-file=
for YAML with focus descriptions:
/council
--perspectives
=
"security-auditor,performance-critic,simplicity-advocate"
validate src/auth/
/council --perspectives-file
=
.agents/perspectives/api-review.yaml validate src/api/
YAML format
for
--perspectives-file
:
perspectives
:
-
name
:
security
-
auditor
focus
:
Find security vulnerabilities and trust boundary violations
-
name
:
performance
-
critic
focus
:
Identify performance bottlenecks and scaling risks
Flag priority:
--perspectives
/
--perspectives-file
override
--preset
perspectives.
--count
always overrides judge count. Without
--count
, judge count auto-escalates to match perspective count.
See
references/personas.md
for all built-in presets and their perspective definitions.
Explorer Sub-Agents
Explorer Details:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/explorers.md
for explorer architecture, prompts, sub-question generation, and timeout configuration.
Summary:
Judges can spawn explorer sub-agents (
--explorers=N
, max 5) for parallel deep-dive research. Total agents =
judges * (1 + explorers)
, capped at MAX_AGENTS=12.
Debate Phase (
--debate
)
Debate Protocol:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/debate-protocol.md
for full debate execution flow, R1-to-R2 verdict injection, timeout handling, and cost analysis.
Summary:
Two-round adversarial review. R1 produces independent verdicts. R2 sends other judges' verdicts via backend messaging (
send_input
or
SendMessage
) for steel-manning and revision. Only supported with validate mode.
Agent Prompts
Agent Prompts:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/agent-prompts.md
for judge prompts (default and perspective-based), consolidation prompt, and debate R2 message template.
Consensus Rules
Condition
Verdict
All PASS
PASS
Any FAIL
FAIL
Mixed PASS/WARN
WARN
All WARN
WARN
Disagreement handling:
If Claude says PASS and Codex says FAIL → DISAGREE (surface both)
Severity-weighted: Security FAIL outweighs style WARN
DISAGREE resolution:
When vendors disagree, the spawner presents both positions with reasoning and defers to the user. No automatic tie-breaking — cross-vendor disagreement is a signal worth human attention.
Output Format
Report Templates:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/output-format.md
for full report templates (validate, brainstorm, research) and debate report additions (verdict shifts, convergence detection).
All reports write to
.agents/council/YYYY-MM-DD--.md
.
Finding Extraction (Flywheel Closure)
After writing the council report, extract significant findings for the knowledge flywheel:
Skip if PASS.
Nothing to extract from successful reviews.
Filter findings:
Keep only severity >=
significant
AND confidence >=
MEDIUM
.
Classify each:
learning
(process gap),
finding
(code/design defect), or
rule
(repeatable constraint).
Compute dedup key:
sha256(finding_description)
. Skip if already in the file.
Append
one JSON line per finding to
.agents/council/extraction-candidates.jsonl
.
Candidates are staged for human review or
/post-mortem
consumption — they are
never
auto-promoted to MEMORY.md.
See
references/finding-extraction.md
for the full schema and classification heuristics.
Configuration
Partial Completion
Minimum quorum:
1 agent.
Recommended:
80% of judges. On timeout, proceed with remaining judges and note in report. On user cancellation, shutdown all judges and generate partial report with INCOMPLETE marker.
Environment Variables
Variable
Default
Description
COUNCIL_TIMEOUT
120
Agent timeout in seconds
COUNCIL_CODEX_MODEL
gpt-5.3-codex
Override Codex model for --mixed. Set explicitly to pin Codex judge behavior; omit to use user's configured default.
COUNCIL_CLAUDE_MODEL
sonnet
Claude model for judges (sonnet default — use opus for high-stakes via
--profile=thorough
)
COUNCIL_EXPLORER_MODEL
sonnet
Model for explorer sub-agents
COUNCIL_EXPLORER_TIMEOUT
60
Explorer timeout in seconds
COUNCIL_R2_TIMEOUT
90
Maximum wait time for R2 debate completion after sending debate messages. Shorter than R1 since judges already have context.
Flags
Flag
Description
--deep
3 Claude agents instead of 2
--mixed
Add 3 Codex agents
--debate
Enable adversarial debate round (2 rounds via backend messaging, same agents). Incompatible with
--quick
.
--timeout=N
Override timeout in seconds (default: 120)
--perspectives="a,b,c"
Custom perspective names (each name sets the judge's system prompt to adopt that viewpoint)
--perspectives-file=
Load named perspectives from a YAML file (see Named Perspectives below)
--preset=
Built-in persona preset (security-audit, architecture, research, ops, code-review, plan-review, doc-review, retrospective, product, developer-experience)
--count=N
Override agent count per vendor (e.g.,
--count=4
= 4 Claude, or 4+4 with --mixed). Subject to MAX_AGENTS=12 cap.
--explorers=N
Explorer sub-agents per judge (default: 0, max: 5). Max effective value depends on judge count. Total agents capped at 12.
--explorer-model=M
Override explorer model (default: sonnet)
--technique=
Brainstorm technique (scamper, six-hats, reverse). Case-insensitive. Only applicable to brainstorm mode — error if combined with validate/research. If omitted, unstructured brainstorm (current behavior). See
references/brainstorm-techniques.md
.
--profile=
Model quality profile (thorough, balanced, fast). Error if unrecognized name. Overridden by
COUNCIL_CLAUDE_MODEL
env var (highest priority), then by explicit
--count
/
--deep
/
--mixed
. See
references/model-profiles.md
.
CLI Spawning Commands
CLI Spawning:
Use
Read
tool on
skills/council/references/cli-spawning.md
for team setup, Claude/Codex agent spawning, parallel execution, debate R2 commands, cleanup, and model selection.
Examples
/council validate recent
2 judges, recent commits
/council
--deep
--preset
=
architecture research the auth system
3 judges with architecture personas
/council
--mixed
validate this plan
3 Claude + 3 Codex
/council
--deep
--explorers
=
3
research upgrade patterns
12 agents (3 judges x 4)
/council
--preset
=
security-audit
--deep
validate the API
attacker, defender, compliance, web-security
/council
--preset
=
doc-review validate README.md
4 doc judges with named perspectives
/council brainstorm caching strategies
for
the API
2 judges explore options
/council
--technique
=
scamper brainstorm API improvements
structured SCAMPER brainstorm
/council
--technique
=
six-hats brainstorm migration strategy
parallel perspectives brainstorm
/council
--profile
=
thorough validate the security architecture
opus, 3 judges, 120s timeout
/council
--profile
=
fast validate recent
haiku, 2 judges, 60s timeout
/council research Redis vs Memcached
for
session storage
2 judges assess trade-offs
/council validate the implementation plan
in
PLAN.md
structured plan feedback
/council
--preset
=
doc-review validate docs/ARCHITECTURE.md
4 doc review judges
/council
--perspectives
=
"security-auditor,perf-critic"
validate src/
named perspectives
/council --perspectives-file
.agents/perspectives/custom.yaml validate
perspectives from file
Fast Single-Agent Validation
User says:
/council --quick validate recent
What happens:
Agent gathers context (recent diffs, files) inline without spawning
Agent performs structured self-review using council output schema
Report written to
.agents/council/YYYY-MM-DD-quick-.md
labeled
Mode: quick (single-agent)
Result:
Fast sanity check for routine validation (no cross-perspective insights or debate).
Adversarial Debate Review
User says:
/council --debate validate the auth system
What happens:
Agent spawns 2 judges (runtime-native backend) with independent perspectives
R1: Judges assess independently, write verdicts to
.agents/council/
R2: Team lead sends other judges' verdicts via backend messaging
Judges revise positions based on cross-perspective evidence
Consolidation: Team lead computes consensus with convergence detection
Result:
Two-round review with steel-manning and revision, useful for high-stakes decisions.
Cross-Vendor Consensus with Explorers
User says:
/council --mixed --explorers=2 research Kubernetes upgrade strategies
What happens:
Agent spawns 3 Claude judges + 3 Codex judges (6 total)
Each judge spawns 2 explorer sub-agents (6 x 3 = 18 total agents, exceeds MAX_AGENTS)
Agent auto-scales to 2 judges per vendor (4 x 3 = 12 agents at limit)
Explorers perform parallel deep-dives, return sub-findings to judges
Judges consolidate explorer findings with own research
Result:
Cross-vendor research with deep exploration, capped at 12 total agents.
Troubleshooting
Problem
Cause
Solution
"Error: --quick and --debate are incompatible"
Both flags passed together
Use
--quick
for fast inline check OR
--debate
for multi-round review, not both
"Error: --debate is only supported with validate mode"
Debate flag used with brainstorm/research
Remove
--debate
or switch to validate mode — brainstorming/research have no PASS/FAIL verdicts
Council spawns fewer agents than expected
--explorers=N
exceeds MAX_AGENTS (12)
Agent auto-scales judge count. Check report header for actual judge count. Reduce
--explorers
or use
--count
to manually set judges
Codex judges skipped in --mixed mode
Codex CLI not on PATH
Install Codex CLI (
brew install codex
). Model uses user's configured default — no specific model required.
No output files in
.agents/council/
Permission error or disk full
Check directory permissions with
ls -ld .agents/council/
. Council auto-creates missing dirs.
Agent timeout after 120s
Slow file reads or network issues
Increase timeout with
--timeout=300
or check
COUNCIL_TIMEOUT
env var. Default: 120s.
Migration from judge
/council
replaces the old judge skill. Migration:
Old
New
judge recent
/council validate recent
judge 2 opus
/council recent
(default)
judge 3 opus
/council --deep recent
Deprecated:
The /judge skill was replaced by
/council
in v2.8. The judge skill will be removed in v3.0. Migrate all judge invocations to
/council
.
Multi-Agent Architecture
Council uses whatever multi-agent primitives your runtime provides. Each judge is a parallel subagent that writes output to a file and sends a minimal completion signal to the lead.
Deliberation Protocol
The
--debate
flag implements the
deliberation protocol
pattern:
Independent assessment → evidence exchange → position revision → convergence analysis
R1:
Spawn judges as parallel subagents. Each assesses independently, writes verdict to file, signals completion.
R2:
Lead sends other judges' verdict summaries to each judge via agent messaging. Judges revise and write R2 files.
Consolidation:
Lead reads all output files, computes consensus.
Cleanup:
Shut down judges via runtime's cleanup mechanism.
Communication Rules
Judges → lead only.
Judges never message each other directly. This prevents anchoring.
Lead → judges.
Only the lead sends follow-ups (for debate R2).
No shared task mutation by judges.
Lead manages coordination state.
Ralph Wiggum Compliance
Council maintains fresh-context isolation (Ralph Wiggum pattern) with one documented exception:
--debate
reuses judge context across R1 and R2.
This is intentional. Judges persist within a single atomic council invocation — they do NOT persist across separate council calls. The rationale:
Judges benefit from their own R1 analytical context (reasoning chain, not just the verdict JSON) when evaluating other judges' positions in R2
Re-spawning with only the verdict summary (~200 tokens) would lose the judge's working memory of WHY they reached their verdict
The exception is bounded: max 2 rounds, within one invocation, with explicit cleanup
Without
--debate
, council is fully Ralph-compliant: each judge is a fresh spawn, executes once, writes output, and terminates.
Degradation
If no multi-agent capability is detected, council falls back to
--quick
(inline single-agent review). If agent messaging is unavailable,
--debate
degrades to single-round review with a note in the report.
Judge Naming
Convention:
council-YYYYMMDD-
(e.g.,
council-20260206-auth-system
).
Judge names:
judge-{N}
for independent judges (e.g.,
judge-1
,
judge-2
), or
judge-{perspective}
when using presets/perspectives (e.g.,
judge-error-paths
,
judge-feasibility
). Use the same logical names across both Codex and Claude backends.
See Also
skills/vibe/SKILL.md
— Complexity + council for code validation (uses
--preset=code-review
when spec found)
skills/pre-mortem/SKILL.md
— Plan validation (uses
--preset=plan-review
, always 3 judges)
skills/post-mortem/SKILL.md
— Work wrap-up (uses
--preset=retrospective
, always 3 judges + retro)
skills/swarm/SKILL.md
— Multi-agent orchestration
skills/standards/SKILL.md
— Language-specific coding standards
skills/research/SKILL.md
— Codebase exploration (complementary to council research mode)
Reference Documents
references/backend-background-tasks.md
references/backend-claude-teams.md
references/backend-codex-subagents.md
references/backend-inline.md
references/brainstorm-techniques.md
references/claude-code-latest-features.md
references/model-profiles.md
references/presets.md
references/quick-mode.md
references/ralph-loop-contract.md
references/agent-prompts.md
references/cli-spawning.md
references/debate-protocol.md
references/explorers.md
references/finding-extraction.md
references/output-format.md
references/personas.md
references/caching-guidance.md
../shared/references/backend-background-tasks.md
../shared/references/backend-claude-teams.md
../shared/references/backend-codex-subagents.md
../shared/references/backend-inline.md
../shared/references/claude-code-latest-features.md
../shared/references/ralph-loop-contract.md