Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add chrisblattman/claudeblattman/plugin install starter-kitWrote 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/skills/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/council)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/council"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/council/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/skills/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/council"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/council.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 | $0.00055 | $0.02011 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01006 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00402 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
council 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 10d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 129 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/council — Parallel Critics, Then a Separate Synthesis
Dispatch 3–4 critic agents in parallel on the same input, collect their raw critiques, then run ONE synthesis pass in a fresh context. Hard cap: 4 critics. Single round only — critics speak once, the synthesizer reads once. Never turn the critiques into a majority vote.
Why this shape:
- Parallel, not sequential — independent critics with different lenses catch different problems, and nobody anchors on whoever spoke first.
- One round only — no debate or rebuttals. Multi-round AI debate drifts toward consensus, not accuracy.
- Separate synthesis — a fresh-context pass reads the critiques as data instead of being swayed by the conversation that produced them.
The four shipped critics
| Critic | Lens |
|---|---|
skeptic |
Wishful thinking — which load-bearing claims aren't backed by evidence? |
pre-mortem |
Works backward from failure — the top 3 ways this fails |
completeness-checker |
What's missing that a domain expert would expect? |
chief-of-staff |
What's the actual decision, and what does saying yes cost the user? |
Persona files live at ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/agents/<name>.md.
Default panels
| Task type | Panel | N |
|---|---|---|
| Plan / architecture / workflow review | skeptic, pre-mortem, completeness-checker | 3 |
| Decision support ("should I…") | skeptic, pre-mortem, chief-of-staff | 3 |
Paper and grant-proposal panels need additional personas — future release. If the user asks for one, say so and offer the plan panel as the closest fit.
Inferring the type when --type isn't given: "plan / design / architecture / workflow" → plan; "should I / decide / go or no-go / accept or reject" → decision; unclear → ask one line: "Is this a plan review or a decision?"
When NOT to run a council
- Quick lookups, single-file edits, casual brainstorming — just answer.
- Inputs under ~50 words of substance — there isn't enough for three critics to disagree about. Offer a quick single review instead.
- If it's unclear whether the user wants a council run or is just discussing councils as a topic, ask one line before dispatching.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 129 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 818ec58f8e9c
council is a skill published in the GitHub repository chrisblattman/claudeblattman (452 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 2,011 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
skill-builder
Automatically detect source types and build AI skills using Skill Seekers. Use when the user wants to create skills from documentation, repos, PDFs, videos, or other knowledge sources.
ai-ml-development
AI and machine learning development with PyTorch, TensorFlow, and LLM integration. Use when building ML models, training pipelines, fine-tuning LLMs, or implementing AI features.
android-development
Android development with Kotlin, Jetpack Compose, and modern Android architecture. Use when building Android apps, implementing Material Design, or following Android best practices.
authentication-patterns
OAuth 2.0, JWT, SSO, MFA, NextAuth/Clerk/Supabase Auth implementation patterns.
case-interview-practice
Interactive consulting case interview practice with structured frameworks, feedback mechanisms, and progressive difficulty. Use when preparing for management consulting interviews, case competitions, or business problem-solving exercises.
email-systems
Transactional email (Resend, SendGrid, SES), templates (React Email, MJML), deliverability (SPF/DKIM/DMARC), and inboxing best practices. Use when building email infrastructure, designing templates, or troubleshooting deliverability.