po-council

Featured

Review a hard-to-reverse Atlas product decision with Evidence plus one risk specialist, testing whether it restores a named human ability.

Code & Development 139 stars 21 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 87/100

Stars 20%
71
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Atlas PO review — two critics, one accountable owner The active pilot does not summon a standing committee. `pnpm po:route` derives the primary risk from change facts and all four boundary assessments, then selects Evidence plus exactly one specialist. The human owner decides. Both seats apply the **Human value** section of `docs/PRODUCT-OWNER-OPERATING-SYSTEM.md`: test the person's before/after ability, not comfort or feature volume. Use the existing outcome and recovery-proof fields for understanding, evidence-calibrated confidence, intervention, and later reuse. Do not introduce another score, reviewer, or approval stage. Give each seat the current **Atlas product thesis** in `docs/PRODUCT-DIRECTION.md` as primary context. The seats are Atlas specialists, not independent generic product consultants: they share the source-meaning, task-brief, human-review, and next-task-reuse model, while independently testing its assumptions from their assigned risk. Preserve evidence against that model. ## Reviewer map These are available roles, not a standing five-person council. Ordinary reversible work stays solo; a routed review uses Evidence and one specialist. `chief` coordinates when needed and is not another review vote. | Derived risk | Required reviewers | Independent question | |---|---|---| | `meaning` | `po-evidence` + `po-steward` | Is the lost human ability observed, and do meaning, evidence truth, local-first behavior, agent authority, and correction stay trustwort...

Details

Author
wlsdks
Repository
wlsdks/ontology-atlas
Created
5 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
TypeScript
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Featured

po-pass

Route Atlas product work from observable change facts and one human-recovery outcome; use a compact solo pass for reversible work.

139 Updated today
wlsdks
AI & Automation Listed

panel-review

STORM-style multi-perspective review of a piece of writing or a system design — ending in a disagreement map and a decided verdict.

0 Updated 4 days ago
roufmlp
AI & Automation Listed

critical-council-review

Convene a council of independent, domain-relevant experts to critically analyze a given result or artifact ��� code, a document, plain text, a prior answer, or anything the user points at — where each expert scrutinizes their own area and a final executive weighs all findings and decides on concrete next actions. Built to resist prompt bias and sycophancy — it judges the work against evidence and professional standards instead of telling the user what they want to hear. Use whenever the user wants a produced result critiqued, reviewed, audited, stress-tested, quality-checked, or torn apart by experts — e.g. "review this", "critique this output", "find the flaws", "is this any good", "get expert eyes on this", "analyze this from multiple angles" — or hands over a draft, codebase, or document and asks whether it holds up and what to do next. Especially apt when the thing under review was itself produced by AI, including an earlier turn, and the user wants an unbiased second opinion rather than validation. Not for

1 Updated 1 months ago
k-vaca