From research-analysis
Multi-agent collaborative debate producing visible round-by-round transcripts with real intellectual friction. Members custom-composed via ComposeAgent with domain expertise tailored to the topic — never generic. Workflows: DEBATE (3 rounds, full transcript + synthesis, parallel within rounds, 40-90s), QUICK (1 round, fast perspective check). 4-6 well-composed agents outperform 12 generic ones. Collaborative-adversarial — debate to find the best path. USE WHEN council, debate, multiple perspectives, weigh options, deliberate, get different views, what would experts say, pros and cons. NOT FOR pure adversarial attack (use RedTeam).
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/research-analysis:CouncilThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Runs a multi-agent debate. Custom-composed agents discuss a topic over rounds, respond to each other's actual points, and surface insights through real intellectual friction. You get a visible round-by-round transcript plus a synthesis. DEBATE runs three rounds; QUICK runs one for a fast perspective check.
Runs a multi-agent debate. Custom-composed agents discuss a topic over rounds, respond to each other's actual points, and surface insights through real intellectual friction. You get a visible round-by-round transcript plus a synthesis. DEBATE runs three rounds; QUICK runs one for a fast perspective check.
When you ask one model for an opinion, you get one frame and one set of blind spots. Asking for "pros and cons" gives you a flat list with no one actually pushing back. Real deliberation needs distinct experts who disagree on the merits and argue it out, so the weak parts of an idea get exposed before you commit. Generic built-in agents all sound the same and produce bland agreement; this skill composes topic-specific agents that create genuine friction.
Custom-composed agents discuss topics in rounds, respond to each other's points, and surface insights through intellectual friction.
ALL council members MUST be custom-composed agents created via the Agents skill's ComposeAgent tool (bun run ~/.claude/skills/Agents/Tools/ComposeAgent.ts). NEVER use built-in agent types (Architect, Designer, Engineer, PerplexityResearcher, etc.).
Built-in types are generic and topic-ignorant. Council debates require agents with:
See CouncilMembers.md for full agent composition instructions.
Key Differentiator from RedTeam: Council is collaborative-adversarial (debate to find best path), while RedTeam is purely adversarial (attack the idea). Council produces visible conversation transcripts; RedTeam produces steelman + counter-argument.
Route to the appropriate workflow based on the request.
| Trigger | Workflow |
|---|---|
| Full structured debate (3 rounds, visible transcript) | Workflows/Debate.md |
| Quick consensus check (1 round, fast) | Workflows/Quick.md |
Pure adversarial analysis is not a Council workflow — redirect to the RedTeam skill.
| Workflow | Purpose | Rounds | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEBATE | Full structured discussion | 3 | Complete transcript + synthesis |
| QUICK | Fast perspective check | 1 | Initial positions only |
| File | Content |
|---|---|
CouncilMembers.md | How to compose custom agents for councils (ComposeAgent) |
RoundStructure.md | Three-round debate structure and timing |
OutputFormat.md | Transcript format templates |
Origin: Best decisions emerge from diverse perspectives challenging each other. Not just collecting opinions - genuine intellectual friction where domain-specific experts respond to each other's actual points.
Agents: Every council uses custom-composed agents via the Agents skill. This gives each member a unique voice, personality, and domain expertise tailored to the topic. Generic built-in agents produce generic debate. Custom agents produce sharp, informed debate.
Speed: Parallel execution within rounds, sequential between rounds. A 3-round debate of 4 agents = 12 agent calls but only 3 sequential waits. Complete in 40-90 seconds.
"Council: Should we use WebSockets or SSE?"
-> Compose 4 custom agents with relevant traits (real-time, frontend, ops, research)
-> DEBATE workflow -> 3-round transcript
"Quick council check: Is this API design reasonable?"
-> Compose 4 custom agents with API-relevant traits
-> QUICK workflow -> Fast perspectives
"Council: Is AI overhyped?"
-> Compose agents: AI builder, security skeptic, pragmatic engineer, evidence analyst
-> DEBATE workflow -> 3-round transcript
Depends on:
Works well with:
Last Updated: 2026-03-18
Replace WORKFLOW_USED with the workflow executed, 8_WORD_SUMMARY with a brief input description, and SECONDS with approximate wall-clock time. Log status: "error" if the workflow failed.
npx claudepluginhub p/fadrienne-research-analysis-plugins-research-analysisGuides completion of development work by verifying tests, detecting environment, and presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup.
Guides creation and editing of skills using test-driven development with pressure scenarios and subagents to verify agent compliance.
Dispatches multiple subagents concurrently for independent tasks without shared state. Use when facing 2+ unrelated failures or subsystems that can be investigated in parallel.