council

# Council Convene four advisors for ambiguous decisions: - the in-context Claude voice - a Skeptic subagent - a Pragmatist subagent - a Critic subagent This is for **decision-making under ambiguity**, not code review, implementation planning, or architecture design. ## When to Use Use council when: - a decision has multiple credible paths and no obvious winner - you need explicit tradeoff surfacing - the user asks for second opinions, dissent, or multiple perspectives - conversational anchoring is a real risk - a go / no-go call would benefit from adversarial challenge Examples: - monorepo vs polyrepo - ship now vs hold for polish - feature flag vs full rollout - simplify scope vs keep strategic breadth ## When NOT to Use | Instead of council | Use | | --- | --- | | Verifying whether output is correct | `santa-method` | | Breaking a feature into implementation steps | `planner` | | Designing system architecture | `architect` | | Reviewing code for bugs or security | `code-reviewer` or `santa-method` | | Straight factual questions | just answer directly | | Obvious execution tasks | just do the task | ## Roles | Voice | Lens | | --- | --- | | Architect | correctness, maintainability, long-term implications | | Skeptic | premise challenge, simplification, assumption breaking | | Pragmatist | shipping speed, user impact, operational reality | | Critic | edge cases, downside risk, failure modes | The three external voices should be launched as fresh subagents with **onl...