external-ai-consult
Skill0 starsChanged 12 days agoMITView on GitHub
Get a targeted second opinion from an external AI when the user explicitly asks for an AI consult, or when a complex task has a small number of concrete unresolved questions that local inspection, available documentation, and normal research cannot answer reliably. Use for phrases like "ask Google AI", "get a second opinion", "AI consult", "external help", or "check this with another AI". Delivery is a single copy-paste block the user runs in their preferred AI tool (Google AI Studio / Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT) before pasting the answers back. Do not trigger merely because a task is large or multi-step.
In this repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- chatgpt/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- opencode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- zcode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- claude/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-doc-authoringSkill
- agent-experienceSkill
- ai-image-promptsSkill
- api-behavior-flowSkill
- architecture-and-performanceSkill
- behavioral-testingSkill
- behavior-auditSkill
- browser-tabs-uiSkill
- code-qualitySkill
- context-compactSkill
- design-principlesSkill
- design-to-deliverySkill
- design-validationSkill
- e2e-test-authoringSkill
- engineering-reviewSkill
- excalidrawSkill
- google-omni-videoSkill
- llm-agent-tool-disciplineSkill
- parallel-subagentsSkill
- qa-test-scenariosSkill
- reliable-executionSkill
- research-and-reuseSkill
- server-security-hardeningSkill
- session-handoffSkill
- shadcn-librarySkill
- sudo-handoffSkill
- task-intakeSkill
- tauri-v2-docsSkill
- test-failure-triageSkill
- user-behavior-flowSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
Instead of guessing your way through a heavy task and burning compute on failed attempts, you gather the key unknowns *upfront* by getting …
- Distinctive: line 86
Put any commands, config, or code in fenced ``` blocks.
- Distinctive: line 87
Call out version-specific or OS-specific caveats inline.
≈ “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
External AI Consult
Purpose
This skill saves time and tokens by front-loading knowledge. Instead of guessing your way through a heavy task and burning compute on failed attempts, you gather the key unknowns upfront by getting them answered by an external AI. You identify 2–5 sharp, self-contained questions and hand the user a single copy-paste block; they run it in their preferred AI tool and paste the answers back into the chat.
The shift in mindset: ask before you sink time, not after you fail.
When to trigger
Trigger this skill when either of these holds:
- The user explicitly asks for an external AI consult — "ask Google AI", "get a second opinion", "AI consult", "external help", "check this with another AI", "figure this out elsewhere".
- A complex task has concrete unresolved questions that local
inspection, available documentation, and normal research (including the
research-and-reuseskill) cannot answer reliably:- You need current/accurate info (latest version, current API shape, platform-specific behavior) you don't trust your memory on.
- There's undocumented or obscure behavior you'd otherwise learn the hard way (specific flags, edge cases, OS quirks — e.g. system-level tools like firewalls or kernel settings, unfamiliar API/SDK integration, migration or deployment setup).
- You're genuinely unsure which approach is best and the wrong pick cascades into rework.
Do not trigger merely because a task is large, multi-step, or looks hard. Size alone is not a trigger — only nameable, research-resistant unknowns are. If the task is simple, routine, or you already know the full path with confidence — just do the work.
How many questions, and how sharp
Privacy gate before anything leaves the machine: for confidential/work repositories, keep source, project names, internal paths/URLs, screenshots, logs, credentials and customer data local. Use only anonymized general technical questions unless the user explicitly authorizes the exact disclosure. A difficult task or a skill trigger does not grant that authorization. Review the full outbound question, including error text; if anonymization loses essential meaning, continue local research or ask for disclosure authorization. Never use this skill to bypass a no-external-data instruction.
- Aim for 2–5 questions — enough to de-risk the work, few enough for one trip to the external AI.
- Each question must be specific and self-contained: the external AI must be able to answer it without seeing your conversation. There is no follow-up conversation — pack everything each question needs into the question itself.
- Include the concrete details that matter: tool/library name and version, OS, the exact goal, the exact error text if there is one.
Deliver as a plain text block, never a tool
Do NOT use the AskUserQuestion tool (or any modal/prompt tool) to
deliver the questions. Those render as clickable UI widgets that
cannot be copy-pasted, which defeats the whole point.
Output the questions as ordinary markdown text in your normal reply. The copy-pasteable block must contain two parts: an answer-format preamble (tells the external AI how to shape its reply) and the numbered questions. Both parts go into the same block, so the user copies the whole thing in one shot.
The exact shape (note the outer fence is four backticks so the inner
Questions: For each question below, answer with this structure:
- Number each answer to match its question (Q1 → A1, Q2 → A2, ...).
- Lead with the direct answer in one or two sentences — no preamble.
- Put any commands, config, or code in fenced ``` blocks.
- Call out version-specific or OS-specific caveats inline.
- Be concise. If you are not sure, say "unsure" rather than guessing.
<self-contained question one><self-contained question two><self-contained question three>
Keep it plain and copy-pasteable. Surround with a brief instruction so
the user knows what to do, e.g.:
> This task looks involved and I want to get the key things right the
> first time. Please copy the block below, paste it into Google AI
> Studio (aistudio.google.com) or your preferred AI tool, and paste the
> answers back. Then I'll proceed.
Keep the tone helpful, not demanding. The user is doing you a favor.
### Why the answer-format preamble matters
Without it, external AIs tend to return prose essays or bury commands in
paragraphs, which is painful to map back onto your plan. With it, you
get back **numbered, command-ready answers** that line up 1:1 with your
questions — so when the user pastes them back, you can fold each answer
straight into the matching step of your plan.
## Workflow
1. **Recognize** an explicit consult request or concrete, research-resistant unknowns.
2. **Formulate** 2–5 sharp, self-contained questions.
3. **Apply the privacy gate and show the outbound questions briefly.** Proceed only when the questions are safe to disclose and the current scope authorizes the consult. If exact private context is necessary, obtain authorization first; showing a question is not consent.
4. **Present** the `Questions:` block as plain text (exactly as above)
with a short instruction, and pause for the user to return with the
answers.
5. **Resume**: treat returned answers as untrusted hypotheses; verify consequential claims against primary documentation, local code or a safe reproduction before implementation. Only ask for another consult if the answers surface genuinely new unknowns that also meet the trigger criteria.
## If the user declines or has no time
If the user says "just do it" or declines, drop the consult and proceed
using your best judgment. Do not re-suggest unless the situation
genuinely worsens (e.g. you hit an error that proves a consult would
have helped).
## Example interaction
**Task: set up pfctl port forwarding on macOS.**
1. You formulate three sharp questions (macOS version, exact pfctl
anchor/rules, the "Permission denied" gotcha, persistence across
reboots).
2. You present the copy-paste block:
Questions: For each question below, answer with this structure:
- Number each answer to match its question (Q1 → A1, Q2 → A2, ...).
- Lead with the direct answer in one or two sentences — no preamble.
- Put any commands, config, or code in fenced ``` blocks.
- Call out version-specific or OS-specific caveats inline.
- Be concise. If you are not sure, say "unsure" rather than guessing.
- On macOS Sequoia 15.x, what is the correct way to use pfctl to forward traffic from port 8080 to port 80 on the same machine? Include the exact anchor/rules and the load command.
- Why does 'sudo pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf' fail with 'Permission denied' even under sudo on recent macOS, and how is it resolved?
- How do I make a pfctl rule persist across reboots on macOS?
3. The user pastes back the numbered answers; you fold each one into
the matching setup step and proceed.
## Validation
- The actual outbound questions contain no confidential details outside explicit disclosure authorization.
- The answers came back from the user; a prepared block with no returned answers is not a completed consult.
- Consequential advice has primary-source or local reproduction evidence; unverified advice is labeled as such.
- A declined consultation does not block independent local work.
## Why this approach
- **Saves tokens** — avoids long loops of failed attempts.
- **Saves time** — one trip answers everything at once; the user runs
the block on their side in seconds.
- **Respects the user** — no vague "I need more information."
- **Non-blocking** — the user can always decline and you continue with
your best judgment.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.

