CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

claude-council

Convene a council of 5 AI advisors to pressure-test any decision and eliminate Claude's yes-man bias. Five advisors with opposing thinking styles analyze in parallel, 5 peer-reviewers evaluate anonymized outputs, then a Chairman synthesizes one verdict and one concrete next step. Based on the LLM Council methodology by Ole Lehmann and Andrej Karpathy. Trigger on: "council this", "run the council", "war room this", "pressure-test this", "stress-test this", "debate this", "should I X or Y" (when a real tradeoff exists).

Quality

84%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is highly actionable — verbatim prompt templates and precise orchestration mechanics leave nothing to improvisation — and the six-step workflow is clearly sequenced with sensible checkpoints. Its main costs are token efficiency (a redundant closing trigger-phrase section that restates the frontmatter and activation list, plus padded persona prose) and a monolithic 258-line layout that could externalize templates. Lacking any error-recovery guidance for failed agents, workflow clarity sits just below the top anchor.

Suggestions

Remove the closing "Example Trigger Phrases" section — it duplicates the frontmatter description and the "When to Activate" list verbatim; the DO/DO-NOT activation guidance already covers the same ground.

Tighten the five advisor personas to their thinking style and evaluation lens, dropping flavor sentences like "Not a pessimist — the friend who saves you from a bad deal..." since the templates only need the operative perspective.

Move the four prompt templates (advisor, reviewer, Chairman) into a references/ file (e.g., references/prompts.md) and reference them one level deep, shrinking SKILL.md to the workflow overview and activation rules; alternatively add a brief fallback instruction for when a sub-agent fails or returns an off-spec response to lift workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Trigger phrases are repeated three times (frontmatter, "When to Activate", and the closing "Example Trigger Phrases" section) and advisor personas carry flavor text like "Not a pessimist — the friend who saves you from a bad deal by asking the questions you're avoiding"; the content is mostly efficient but has a fully redundant section and padding that could be trimmed, matching the score-3 anchor rather than the minor-instances anchor at 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Four complete verbatim prompt templates ("use verbatim for each advisor", reviewer, Chairman with exact output structure) plus concrete mechanics (parallel Agent spawning, A–E anonymization, "council-transcript-[timestamp].md" filename) make this copy-paste ready for an instruction-only skill, matching the fully-executable top anchor.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The six steps are clearly sequenced with explicit ordering constraints ("Do NOT run sequentially"), anonymization rules, and collection checkpoints ("Collect all 5 responses"), but there is no error-recovery guidance if an agent fails or returns a weak response — matching clear-sequence-with-minor-validation-gaps at 4 rather than the feedback-loops anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with clear headers, no nested references, and no inlined bulk reference material, but at ~258 lines it is a single monolithic file where the ~100 lines of prompt templates and persona descriptions could be split into a references file, fitting good-structure-with-minor-gaps at 4 rather than the appropriately-split top anchor.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description: it states the full multi-stage pipeline in concrete third-person-style verbs and pairs it with an explicit trigger list of natural user phrases. The only weaknesses are a few missing common trigger synonyms and a couple of broad phrases ("debate this", "should I X or Y") that create minor overlap risk with generic decision-making skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates the complete pipeline in concrete actions — "Convene a council of 5 AI advisors", "analyze in parallel", "5 peer-reviewers evaluate anonymized outputs", "a Chairman synthesizes one verdict and one concrete next step" — covering every stage of the skill comprehensively, matching the top anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: what (five advisors analyzing in parallel, five peer-reviewers evaluating anonymized outputs, a Chairman synthesizing a verdict and next step) and when ("Trigger on: 'council this', 'run the council', ..." with concrete trigger phrases), which is an exact match for the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"council this", "run the council", "war room this", "pressure-test this", "stress-test this", "debate this" give good natural-phrase coverage, but common variations users would say ("red-team this", "devil's advocate", "I can't decide", "get a second opinion") are missing, so it stops short of the comprehensive-synonyms anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"council this" and "war room this" are highly distinct triggers carving a clear niche, but "debate this" and "should I X or Y" are generic phrases that could overlap with general decision-support or brainstorming skills, fitting the mostly-distinct/minor-overlap anchor at 4 rather than minimal-conflict at 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

valeriibeck-star/claude-skills

Path

skills/claude-council/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.