forge-council
Skill2 starsChanged 7 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use only on a councilTrigger FULL verdict: 5 independent advisors.
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ForgeyClap/claude-forgeedited, first seen Oct 11, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- ForgeyClap/claude-forge★ 293% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository99 other files it gives its agents.
- docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- brainstormingSkill
- claude-md-improverSkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- executing-plansSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- forge-a11ySkill
- forge-agent-reportSkill
- forge-agentSkill
- forge-apiSkill
- forge-authSkill
- forge-autoresearchSkill
- forge-botsSkill
- forge-brainstormSkill
- forge-cliSkill
- forge-cmsSkill
- forge-code-reviewSkill
- forge-contextSkill
- forge-craftSkill
- forge-databaseSkill
- forge-dataSkill
- forge-debugSkill
- forge-deeplearnSkill
- forge-devopsSkill
- forge-docdriftSkill
- forge-doctorSkill
- forge-ecc-adapterSkill
- forge-ecommerceSkill
- forge-electronSkill
- forge-extensionSkill
- forge-figmaSkill
- forge-fullstackSkill
- forge-gameSkill
- forge-graded-verifySkill
- forge-guardianSkill
- forge-heartbeatSkill
- forge-i18n-docsSkill
- forge-intakeSkill
- forge-integrationSkill
- forge-long-form-writingSkill
- forge-mcp-clientsSkill
- forge-memorySkill
- forge-migrationSkill
- forge-mindmapSkill
- forge-mlopsSkill
- forge-mobileSkill
- forge-n8nSkill
- forge-nightshiftSkill
- forge-observabilitySkill
- forge-paymentsSkill
- forge-plan-largeSkill
- forge-prdSkill
- forge-predictionSkill
- forge-projectbrainSkill
- forge-prompt-coachSkill
- forge-qualitySkill
- forge-ragSkill
- forge-registrySkill
- forge-releaseSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 9
Use ONLY when councilTrigger() (forge-quality.cjs) says FULL: an explicit owner request for pushback, or high impact + high uncertainty.
- Very specific: line 17
Step 0 — neutral framing: Write the decision question NEUTRALLY (no preferred direction, no "we lean towards X"): context, options, …
- Distinctive: line 53
Consensus is never proof: Every council decision that touches code still requires ordinary tests/measurements afterward.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
forge-council — LLM Council (FULL protocol)
Use ONLY when councilTrigger() (forge-quality.cjs) says FULL: an explicit owner request for
pushback, or high impact + high uncertainty. Never by default, never on simple tasks — the
expected information gain must outweigh latency, cost and context load. LIGHT exists as an outcome
of the trigger but deliberately has NO protocol here yet: first a benchmark that proves its value
(anti-overengineering); until then LIGHT falls back to one targeted second opinion.
Protocol (FULL)
Step 0 — neutral framing. Write the decision question NEUTRALLY (no preferred direction, no
"we lean towards X"): context, options, criteria, hard limits. Compute context_hash =
sha256 of that framing text (forge-quality.cjs::sha256). The framing is a run artifact.
Step 1 — 5 fresh, independent advisors, in parallel. Dispatch via the Agent tool (real subagents, one message with 5 parallel calls; NO simulated agents). Each advisor gets ONLY the neutral framing — no visibility of the others. The five fixed lenses:
- Contrarian — attacks the most popular option; looks for what everyone is missing.
- First Principles — reduces to fundamentals; ignores convention.
- Expansionist — widens the option space; what if the question itself is too narrow?
- Outsider — looks at it as an outsider/end user would; jargon-free.
- Executor — judges feasibility, cost, risk, rollback.
Step 2 — anonymous peer review. Anonymize the five pieces of advice as A-E and send them back to each advisor (a second dispatch round): rank the other four and name the strongest critique of each. Anonymity prevents authority bias and self-preference.
Step 3 — chairman synthesis. The orchestrator (or a separate chairman dispatch) weighs the advice + peer rankings and writes the decision WITH an explicit minority report: dissenting opinions don't disappear, they're recorded alongside the reason.
Record. Fill in a CouncilDecisionRecord: council_id, context_hash, participants (role + runtime +
dispatch_id from the REAL Agent dispatches + response_ref), responses, quorum, verdict,
minority_report, status. Validate with validateCouncilRecord and persist via
node .claude/forge-bin/forge-quality.cjs council-save <run_id> <record.json> — an invalid
record is NOT written (the refusal with a reason is the honest result), and a council_id is
never overwritten.
LIGHT candidate (recorded, NOT active)
The four-voice council of the pinned ECC toolkit (council skill, commit e2b8a51cea22) is recorded as the
candidate LIGHT protocol. It stays inactive until a benchmark shows it changes decisions; until then LIGHT
falls back to one targeted second opinion, as above. No step list is kept here on purpose.
Limits (permanent)
- Validation is shape_only: runtime/dispatch_id are not cryptographically bound; real provenance requires the owner-gated gateway dispatch receipt (OWNER-GATED.md).
- Consensus is never proof. Every council decision that touches code still requires ordinary tests/measurements afterward; the record points to them, never the other way round.
- An INCOMPLETE quorum is honestly marked INCOMPLETE — never padded out.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

