council

Convene four independent voices to critique options and synthesize a verdict.

86|21|Updated Feb 9, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Jamkris/everything-gemini-code --skill council-jamkris
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: council
Source: https://github.com/Jamkris/everything-gemini-code/tree/main/skills/council
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Jamkris/everything-gemini-code --skill council-jamkris

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Convene a four-voice advisory council to surface tradeoffs, dissent, and go/no-go considerations before making ambiguous decisions.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Four independent voices: in-context Gemini voice, Skeptic, Pragmatist, and Critic subagents, each offering distinct perspectives.
  • Structured workflow: extract the real question, gather minimal context, form an Architect position, launch parallel voices, and synthesize a concise verdict.
  • Helpful for strategy, product, or design decisions where multiple credible paths exist and certainty is elusive.

Quick Start

Provide a decision question and relevant context to initiate the council and obtain a structured verdict.

Frequently Asked Questions about council

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I make better decisions when facing ambiguous product strategy options?

Structured adversarial decision-making resolves ambiguous product strategy options by convening four independent voices to critique paths and synthesize a concise go/no-go verdict. It surfaces tradeoffs and dissent before finalizing choices.

What is the best way to surface tradeoffs and dissent before a go/no-go decision?

Convening an advisory council of independent voices, including a Skeptic, Pragmatist, and Critic, is the best way to surface tradeoffs and dissent before a go/no-go decision. They critique options from distinct perspectives to expose blind spots.

How do I facilitate structured decision-making across multiple credible paths?

Facilitate structured decision-making by extracting the real question, gathering minimal context, forming an Architect position, launching parallel voices, and synthesizing a concise verdict. This ensures all viable paths are evaluated systematically.

Can I use this approach for design and strategy decisions where certainty is elusive?

Yes, you can use this approach for design and strategy decisions where certainty is elusive. It is specifically helpful for ambiguous choices across product, strategy, or design where multiple viable paths exist and require structured evaluation.