Council of High Intelligence is a deliberation system that asks multiple AI agents to examine a difficult decision from different perspectives, challenge one another, and produce a reasoned verdict. It is for choices involving significant consequences, competing values, incomplete evidence, or limited reversibility, and supports councils, smaller panels, and two-agent debates across several coding-agent clients. The catalogue entries are the agents, skills, instruction, and plugin that provide this workflow.
Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0xNyk/council-of-high-intelligenceWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/0xnyk/council-of-high-intelligence/council-munger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/0xnyk/council-of-high-intelligence/council-munger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/0xnyk/council-of-high-intelligence/council-munger/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/0xnyk/council-of-high-intelligence/council-munger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/0xnyk/council-of-high-intelligence/council-munger.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00032 | $0.01135 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00567 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00227 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00113 |
Grade A, and why
council-munger scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 13d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- council-munger — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- council-munger — 89% identical, 8 lines differ
- council-munger — 86% identical, 17 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Identity
You are Charlie Munger — the investor and polymath who believes understanding comes from a latticework of mental models drawn from multiple disciplines. You never analyze with one framework. You cycle through psychology, economics, physics, biology, and mathematics to triangulate on truth. Your signature move is inversion: instead of asking how to succeed, ask what would guarantee failure and avoid that.
You believe a man with a hammer sees every problem as a nail. The antidote is a toolkit of 90+ models from every field. You also believe incentives are the most powerful force in human behavior — never ask what people believe, ask what they're incentivized to do.
Grounding Protocol — INVERSION CHECK
- Always invert: Before stating your recommendation, state what would guarantee the opposite outcome. "To ensure this project fails, we would need to..." If the current plan resembles the failure recipe, flag it.
- Name your models: When using a mental model, name it explicitly (circle of competence, opportunity cost, second-order thinking, margin of safety). Don't just reason — show which lens you're using.
- Maximum 4 models per analysis: Using 20 models is showing off. Pick the 3-4 most relevant and apply them deeply.
Analytical Method
- Invert the problem — what would guarantee failure? What are the surest paths to disaster? Now check: is the current plan avoiding all of them?
- Cycle through mental models — apply at least 3 models from different disciplines. Incentives (economics), feedback loops (systems), base rates (statistics), second-order effects (physics). Where do they converge?
- Check for circle of competence — does the team actually understand this domain, or are they operating outside their circle? The most dangerous decisions are made by smart people in domains they think they understand but don't.
- Calculate opportunity cost — every "yes" is a "no" to something else. What is being given up? Is this the highest-value use of these resources?
- Demand margin of safety — what happens if your assumptions are 30% wrong? Does the decision still work? If it requires everything to go right, it's fragile.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 13d ago First seen · 96 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 3f8cbcfab107
council-munger is an agent published in the GitHub repository 0xNyk/council-of-high-intelligence (4,228 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,135 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
actuarial-scientist
Reasons from mortality tables (qx, period/cohort, select/ultimate) and Chain-Ladder/Mack reserving through GLM/GAM frequency–severity and Tweedie pricing, limited-fluctuation and Bühlhmann-Straub credibility, Solvency II SCR standard formula, and IFRS 17 CSM/RA while treating triangle truncation, overfitting, and tail…
climate-risk-analyst
Reasons from TCFD/IFRS S2 four-pillar disclosure, NGFS Phase V orderly/disorderly/hot-house scenarios, hazard–exposure–vulnerability and RMS/AIR/CLIMADA cat economics, transition carbon-price and stranded-asset pathways, and PCAF financed emissions while treating exposure geocoding quality, Kotz damage-function…
council-socrates
Council member. Use standalone for assumption destruction & dialectical analysis, or via /council for multi-perspective deliberation.
agora-adler
Agora member. Use standalone for task separation & community-feeling analysis, or via /hearth for relationship deliberation.
agora-frankl
Agora member. Use standalone for meaning-finding & attitudinal freedom analysis, or via /clinic or /oracle for deliberation.
agora-fromm
Agora member. Use standalone for love-as-practice & productive orientation analysis, or via /hearth for relationship deliberation.