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.
npx skills add majiang213/OpenClaw-MAS --skill councilgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/majiang213/OpenClaw-MASWrote 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/majiang213/openclaw-mas/council)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/council"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/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/majiang213/openclaw-mas/council"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/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 | $0.00038 | $0.01390 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00695 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00278 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00139 |
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.
This is a copy
92% identical to council — 25 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Council
Convene four advisors for ambiguous decisions:
- the in-context Claude voice
- a Skeptic subagent
- a Pragmatist subagent
- a Critic subagent
This is for decision-making under ambiguity, not code review, implementation planning, or architecture design.
When to Use
Use council when:
- a decision has multiple credible paths and no obvious winner
- you need explicit tradeoff surfacing
- the user asks for second opinions, dissent, or multiple perspectives
- conversational anchoring is a real risk
- a go / no-go call would benefit from adversarial challenge
Examples:
- monorepo vs polyrepo
- ship now vs hold for polish
- feature flag vs full rollout
- simplify scope vs keep strategic breadth
When NOT to Use
| Instead of council | Use |
|---|---|
| Verifying whether output is correct | santa-method |
| Breaking a feature into implementation steps | planner |
| Designing system architecture | architect |
| Reviewing code for bugs or security | code-reviewer or santa-method |
| Straight factual questions | just answer directly |
| Obvious execution tasks | just do the task |
Roles
| Voice | Lens |
|---|---|
| Architect | correctness, maintainability, long-term implications |
| Skeptic | premise challenge, simplification, assumption breaking |
| Pragmatist | shipping speed, user impact, operational reality |
| Critic | edge cases, downside risk, failure modes |
The three external voices should be launched as fresh subagents with only the question and relevant context, not the full ongoing conversation. That is the anti-anchoring mechanism.
Workflow
1. Extract the real question
Reduce the decision to one explicit prompt:
- what are we deciding?
- what constraints matter?
- what counts as success?
If the question is vague, ask one clarifying question before convening the council.
2. Gather only the necessary context
If the decision is codebase-specific:
- collect the relevant files, snippets, issue text, or metrics
- keep it compact
- include only the context needed to make the decision
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 · 204 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A fd578d63aace
council is a skill published in the GitHub repository majiang213/OpenClaw-MAS (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,390 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to council, differing in 25 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
sequence-diagram
Show interactions and flows over time. Illustrate request paths, asynchronous patterns, error handling. Use when documenting complex flows or onboarding on system behavior.
architecture-anti-patterns
Identify and avoid common architectural mistakes. Recognize patterns of failure. Use when reviewing designs or learning from mistakes.
architecture-patterns-catalog
Reference catalog of proven architecture patterns. Know when to apply each pattern, tradeoffs, and examples. Use as reference when designing systems.
interview-prep
Prepare for architecture interview questions and scenarios. Practice system design, tradeoff discussions, communication. Use for career development and interview readiness.
system-audit
Conduct comprehensive system architecture evaluation. Assess design quality, technical debt, operational readiness, scalability. Use when auditing existing systems.
technical-mentoring
Coach engineers on architecture and design. Provide feedback, guide learning, support growth. Use when mentoring junior architects or senior engineers.