council

Coordinate multi-advisor council debates to surface tensions and synthesize recommendations.

2.5k|134|Updated Mar 28, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/compozy/compozy --skill council-compozy
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: council
Source: https://github.com/compozy/compozy/tree/main/.agents/skills/council
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/compozy/compozy --skill council-compozy

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) and assets (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

Council-based decision-making for architecture, tech, or product choices is often fragmented. This Skill orchestrates a multi-advisor debate to surface tensions, preserve dissent, and generate structured, actionable recommendations.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Dispatch archetype subagents (pragmatic-engineer, architect-advisor, security-advocate, product-mind, devils-advocate, the-thinker) and coordinate debate across opening, tensions, and synthesis.
  • Track position evolution and concessions, producing a traceable synthesis with clearly stated risks and trade-offs.
  • Use for PRD/tech-spec stress tests, architecture reviews, or high-stakes decisions requiring diverse expert perspectives.

Quick Start

Provide a high-stakes decision scenario and let the council dispatch advisors, surface tensions, and deliver a structured synthesis.

Frequently Asked Questions about council

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
What is multi-advisor architecture decision-making and how does it surface trade-offs?▼

Multi-advisor architecture decision-making dispatches 3-5 archetype subagents to debate high-stakes decisions, tracking tensions, concessions, and position evolution to synthesize actionable recommendations with clearly stated risks.

How do I stress test a PRD or tech spec for complex trade-offs?▼

To stress test a PRD or tech spec, provide the high-stakes decision scenario to the council, which dispatches expert archetypes like pragmatic-engineer, security-advocate, and devils-advocate to surface tensions and deliver a structured synthesis.

Can I use multi-advisor debate for architecture reviews requiring diverse expert perspectives?▼

Yes, multi-advisor debate is designed for architecture reviews and high-stakes decisions requiring diverse expert perspectives, coordinating archetype subagents like architect-advisor, product-mind, and the-thinker to preserve dissent and generate actionable recommendations.

What's the best way to coordinate expert councils for technology decisions?▼

The best way to coordinate expert councils for technology decisions is orchestrating a multi-advisor debate across opening statements, tensions tracking, and final synthesis, producing traceable artifacts that document position evolution and concessions.

Does council-based governance work without external dependencies?▼

Yes, council-based governance operates with zero external dependencies, using internal archetype subagents and a synthesis template to generate structured artifacts for complex trade-off analysis.

When should I not use a multi-advisor council for decision-making?▼

You should avoid multi-advisor council decision-making for simple, low-stakes choices that lack complex trade-offs or diverse expert perspectives, as the archetype debate and tensions tracking overhead outweighs the synthesis value.