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 valpere/chorus --skill councilgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/valpere/chorusWrote 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/valpere/chorus/council)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/valpere/chorus/council"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/valpere/chorus/council.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00062 | $0.00670 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00335 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00134 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00067 |
Grade A, and why
chorus-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 7d 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 — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Chorus: LLM Council
When to use
- User asks for a multi-agent perspective on a decision or problem
- User says "council", "multiple opinions", "ask all agents", "LLM council"
Your role in the council
You are the SCOPE reviewer. Focus on: unnecessary complexity, premature abstractions, whether the smallest viable solution was chosen.
Agent roles
| Agent | Focus |
|---|---|
| Claude | Correctness — logic errors, type safety, security issues |
| Gemini | Edge cases — unusual inputs, failure modes, alternatives |
| Cursor | Integration — codebase fit, patterns, dependency risks |
| Kilo | Maintainability — readability, naming, long-term tech debt |
| (you) | Scope — unnecessary complexity, smallest viable solution |
Invocation
Spawn all four agents in parallel, then add your own scope review:
claude --print "You are the CORRECTNESS reviewer in an LLM council. Focus on: logic errors, type safety, off-by-one bugs, security issues. Be concise — bullet points.\n\nTask: <task>" --dangerously-skip-permissions &
CLAUDE_PID=$!
gemini --prompt "You are the EDGE-CASES reviewer in an LLM council. Focus on: unusual inputs, failure modes, alternatives not considered. Be concise — bullet points.\n\nTask: <task>" --yolo --output-format text &
GEMINI_PID=$!
agent -p --force "You are the INTEGRATION reviewer in an LLM council. Focus on: codebase fit, consistency with existing patterns, dependency implications. Be concise — bullet points.\n\nTask: <task>" &
CURSOR_PID=$!
kilo run --auto "You are the MAINTAINABILITY reviewer in an LLM council. Focus on: readability, naming clarity, long-term tech debt. Be concise — bullet points.\n\nTask: <task>" &
KILO_PID=$!
wait $CLAUDE_PID $GEMINI_PID $CURSOR_PID $KILO_PID
Graceful degradation: Check each agent with command -v <binary> before spawning. Skip missing agents and warn the user. Proceed as long as at least 2 agents (including yourself) are available.
Output handling
After collecting outputs (fewer if some agents were skipped) plus your own scope review, synthesize as chairman:
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 62 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 6b1d83fdccdb
chorus-council is a skill published in the GitHub repository valpere/chorus (10 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 670 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
dead-code-cleanup
Identifies and removes dead/orphaned code, tests, and Storybook stories — including trivial tests that check only obvious behavior or rare edge cases with no real value. Always validates that code is truly unused before deleting anything. Trigger on: "remove dead code", "clean up unused files", "delete orphaned…
comment-reaper
Finds and removes unnecessary code comments - the ones that restate the code, cite an issue number, narrate refactor history, or wrap a one-line function in six lines of JSDoc. Sorts every find into auto-fix, propose, or never-touch, so the WHY comments survive the sweep. Trigger on: "comment reaper", "reap comments"…
code-health-audit
Kicks off a recurring code-health audit — the "embarrassing code" / overengineering sweep that turns vague tech-debt anxiety into a short list of measurable, validated simplifications to ship. Bakes in the pre-flight discipline (sync the correct base branch, confirm the active worktree and its dev server, list files…
pr-review-fix-pipeline
Autonomous PR review that also applies fixes for non-controversial issues — combines review, fix, test, and commit into a single pipeline. Unlike a read-only review, this writes code. Only use on feature branches where you're comfortable with automatic edits. Trigger on: "review and fix PR", "auto-fix the PR", "clean…
abstraction-finder
Scans a codebase or a named area for recurring patterns that could be extracted into shared, general-purpose code, and proposes the smallest form for each — helper, service, base class, template, or util — with the exact call sites it would replace. The inverse of a conformance check: it discovers duplication worth…
band-aid-finder
Scans a change or codebase area for band-aid fixes that suppress a symptom instead of resolving the underlying cause, traces each to its actual root cause, and proposes the fix that addresses it. Distinguishes a band-aid from a deliberate, documented mitigation (incident hotfix, third-party defect…