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.