board-meeting
Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6-phase deliberation: context loading, independent C-suite contributions, critic analysis, synthesis, founder review, and decision extraction. Prevents groupthink through isolated contributions. Use when making major strategic decisions, resolving cross-functional disagreements, evaluating irreversible choices, or when user mentions board meeting, executive deliberation, strategic decision, multi-perspective, or structured deliberation.
What this skill does
# Board Meeting Protocol
Structured multi-agent deliberation that prevents groupthink, captures minority views, and produces clean, actionable decisions. Every phase has a purpose, a format, and rules that cannot be skipped.
## Keywords
board meeting, executive deliberation, strategic decision, C-suite, multi-agent, founder review, decision extraction, independent perspectives, groupthink prevention, synthesis, critic analysis, structured deliberation
---
## The 6-Phase Protocol
```
PHASE 1: Context Gathering
|
PHASE 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)
|
PHASE 3: Critic Analysis (Executive Mentor)
|
PHASE 4: Synthesis (Chief of Staff)
|
PHASE 5: Founder Review (FULL STOP -- human decides)
|
PHASE 6: Decision Extraction and Logging
```
---
### Phase 1: Context Gathering
**Purpose**: Load all relevant context before anyone contributes.
```
Step 1: Load company context (if exists)
Step 2: Load decision history (Layer 2 ONLY -- NEVER raw transcripts)
Step 3: Reset session state -- no bleed from previous conversations
Step 4: Present agenda and activated roles
Step 5: Wait for founder confirmation before proceeding
```
#### Role Activation Matrix
Not all roles attend every meeting. Select based on topic:
| Topic Domain | Activate | Exclude |
|-------------|----------|---------|
| Market expansion | CEO, CMO, CFO, CRO, COO | CTO (unless tech expansion) |
| Product direction | CEO, CPO, CTO, CMO | CFO (unless budget question) |
| Hiring / org | CEO, CHRO, CFO, COO | CMO, CTO (unless their teams) |
| Pricing | CMO, CFO, CRO, CPO | CTO, CHRO |
| Technology | CTO, CPO, CFO, CISO | CMO, CRO |
| Fundraising | CEO, CFO, CRO | CISO, CHRO |
| Security incident | CEO, CTO, CISO, COO | CMO, CRO |
| M&A | CEO, CFO, CTO, CHRO, COO | -- (all relevant) |
**Maximum attendees**: 6 roles per meeting. More than 6 creates noise, not insight.
---
### Phase 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)
**Critical Rule**: No cross-pollination. Each advisor contributes without seeing others' outputs. This is the primary groupthink prevention mechanism.
#### Contribution Order
```
1. Research/data gathering (if needed)
2. CMO -- market perspective
3. CFO -- financial perspective
4. CEO -- strategic perspective
5. CTO -- technical perspective
6. COO -- operational perspective
7. CHRO -- people perspective
8. CRO -- revenue perspective
9. CISO -- security/risk perspective
10. CPO -- product perspective
```
#### Contribution Format (Strict)
Each advisor's contribution must follow this exact format:
```
## [ROLE] -- [DATE]
Key Points (maximum 5):
1. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]
2. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]
3. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]
Recommendation: [Clear position statement]
Confidence: [High / Medium / Low]
Key Assumption: [The one assumption this recommendation depends on]
What Would Change My Mind: [Specific condition or data point]
```
#### Reasoning Techniques by Role
| Role | Technique | How It Works |
|------|-----------|-------------|
| CEO | Tree of Thought | Explore 3 possible futures, evaluate each |
| CFO | Chain of Thought | Show the math, step by step |
| CMO | Recursion of Thought | Draft -> self-critique -> refine |
| CPO | First Principles | Decompose to fundamental user needs |
| CRO | Chain of Thought | Pipeline math must be explicit |
| COO | Step by Step | Map the operational process |
| CTO | Analyze then Act | Research -> analyze -> recommend |
| CISO | Risk-Based | Probability x Impact for every option |
| CHRO | Empathy + Data | Human impact first, then validate with metrics |
---
### Phase 3: Critic Analysis
**Purpose**: The Executive Mentor receives ALL Phase 2 outputs simultaneously and performs adversarial review.
#### Critic Checklist
| Check | Question |
|-------|----------|
| Suspicious consensus | Where did agents agree too easily? |
| Shared assumptions | What assumptions are shared but unvalidated? |
| Missing voice | Who is not in the room? (customer voice? front-line ops?) |
| Unmentioned risk | What risk has nobody mentioned? |
| Domain bleed | Did any agent operate outside their domain? |
| Data quality | Which claims are backed by data vs. assumption? |
| Reversibility | Has anyone assessed if this decision can be undone? |
#### Critic Output Format
```
## CRITIC ANALYSIS
Consensus Assessment:
[Genuine agreement / Suspicious alignment / Split decision]
Unvalidated Assumptions:
1. [Assumption shared by multiple advisors but not verified]
2. [Assumption]
Missing Perspectives:
- [Voice or data point not represented]
Unmentioned Risks:
- [Risk nobody raised]
Domain Violations:
- [If any agent operated outside their domain]
The Uncomfortable Truth:
[The one thing nobody wants to say but needs to be said]
```
---
### Phase 4: Synthesis
**Purpose**: Chief of Staff combines all inputs into a decision-ready format.
#### Synthesis Structure
```
## BOARD MEETING SYNTHESIS
Topic: [topic]
Date: [date]
Attendees: [roles]
### Decision Required
[One sentence: what must be decided]
### Perspectives Summary
| Role | Position | Confidence | Key Concern |
|------|----------|-----------|-------------|
| [Role] | [1-line summary] | [H/M/L] | [Top concern] |
| [Role] | [1-line summary] | [H/M/L] | [Top concern] |
### Where They Agree
[2-3 consensus points]
### Where They Disagree
[Named conflicts with each side's reasoning]
[What the disagreement is really about]
### Critic's View
[The uncomfortable truth from Phase 3]
### Recommended Decision
[Clear recommendation with rationale]
### Action Items (if approved)
1. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
2. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
3. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
### Your Call
[If you disagree with the recommendation, here are alternatives:]
Option A: [description] -- Trade-off: [what you gain/lose]
Option B: [description] -- Trade-off: [what you gain/lose]
```
---
### Phase 5: Founder Review
**FULL STOP. Wait for the founder. No agent acts beyond this point.**
```
FOUNDER REVIEW
[Paste synthesis above]
Options:
[A] Approve as recommended
[M] Modify (specify changes)
[R] Reject (specify reason)
[Q] Ask follow-up question to specific role
[D] Defer decision (specify timeline)
```
#### Phase 5 Rules
| Rule | Rationale |
|------|-----------|
| Founder corrections override all agent proposals | Human judgment is final |
| No pushback on founder decisions | Agents advise, founder decides |
| 30-minute inactivity auto-closes as "pending review" | Prevents zombie meetings |
| Founder can reopen any time | Decisions are not time-locked |
| Follow-up questions go to specific role | Keeps discussion focused |
---
### Phase 6: Decision Extraction
**Purpose**: After founder approval, extract and log all decisions.
```
Step 1: Write full transcript to Layer 1
--> memory/board-meetings/YYYY-MM-DD-raw.md
Step 2: Run conflict detection against existing decisions
--> Check for DO_NOT_RESURFACE violations
--> Check for topic contradictions
--> Check for owner conflicts
Step 3: Surface any conflicts to founder for resolution
Step 4: Append approved decisions to Layer 2
--> memory/board-meetings/decisions.md
Step 5: Mark rejected proposals with DO_NOT_RESURFACE
Step 6: Confirm to founder:
"Meeting concluded. Logged: [N] decisions, [M] action items,
[K] DO_NOT_RESURFACE flags."
```
---
## Failure Mode Reference
| Failure | Detection | Fix |
|---------|-----------|-----|
| Groupthink | All advisors agree without tension | Re-run Phase 2 isolated; force "strongest argument against" |
| Analysis paralysis | Discussion exceeds 5 points per advisor | Cap at 5; force recommendation even with Low confidence |
| Bikeshedding | Discussion on minor points, major decisions deferred | Log as async action; return to main agenda |
| Role bleed | CRelated in AI Agents
skill-development
IncludedComprehensive meta-skill for creating, managing, validating, auditing, and distributing Claude Code skills and slash commands (unified in v2.1.3+). Provides skill templates, creation workflows, validation patterns, audit checklists, naming conventions, YAML frontmatter guidance, progressive disclosure examples, and best practices lookup. Use when creating new skills, validating existing skills, auditing skill quality, understanding skill architecture, needing skill templates, learning about YAML frontmatter requirements, progressive disclosure patterns, tool restrictions (allowed-tools), skill composition, skill naming conventions, troubleshooting skill activation issues, creating custom slash commands, configuring command frontmatter, using command arguments ($ARGUMENTS, $1, $2), bash execution in commands, file references in commands, command namespacing, plugin commands, MCP slash commands, Skill tool configuration, or deciding between skills vs slash commands. Delegates to docs-management skill for official documentation.
reprompter
IncludedTransform messy prompts into well-structured, effective prompts — single or multi-agent. Use when: "reprompt", "reprompt this", "clean up this prompt", "structure my prompt", rough text needing XML tags and best practices, "reprompter teams", "repromptception", "run with quality", "smart run", "smart agents", multi-agent tasks, audits, parallel work, anything going to agent teams. Don't use when: simple Q&A, pure chat, immediate execution-only tasks. See "Don't Use When" section for details. Outputs: Structured XML/Markdown prompt, quality score (before/after), optional team brief + per-agent sub-prompts, agent team output files. Success criteria: Single mode quality score ≥ 7/10; Repromptception per-agent prompt quality score 8+/10; all required sections present, actionable and specific.
adaptive-compaction
IncludedAdaptive add-on policy and recovery layer that decides WHEN to compact, prune, snapshot, or fork -- replacing fixed-percent auto-compaction across Claude Code, Codex, and MCP-capable hosts. Trigger on auto-compact timing or damage: "when should I compact", "is it safe to compact now or start a fresh session", "auto-compact fires too early/mid-task", "switching to an unrelated task but the window still has space", "context rot", "answers get worse the longer the session runs", "the agent forgot the plan or my decisions after it summarized", "add a layer on top that manages context without changing the agent", raising autoCompactWindow to give the policy room, or installing/tuning a cross-tool compaction policy or PreCompact hook -- even when "compaction" is never said but the problem is context-window pressure or post-summarization memory loss. Do NOT use to summarize a conversation, build RAG, write a summarization prompt (decides WHEN not HOW), or answer max-context-length trivia.
agent-skill-creator
IncludedCreate cross-platform agent skills from workflow descriptions. Activates when users ask to create an agent, automate a repetitive workflow, create a custom skill, or need advanced agent creation. Triggers on phrases like create agent for, automate workflow, create skill for, every day I have to, daily I need to, turn process into agent, need to automate, create a cross-platform skill, validate this skill, export this skill, migrate this skill. Supports single skills, multi-agent suites, transcript processing, template-based creation, interactive configuration, cross-platform export, and spec validation.
llm-wiki
IncludedUse when building or maintaining a persistent personal knowledge base (second brain) in Obsidian where an LLM incrementally ingests sources, updates entity/concept pages, maintains cross-references, and keeps a synthesis current. Triggers include "second brain", "Obsidian wiki", "personal knowledge management", "ingest this paper/article/book", "build a research wiki", "compound knowledge", "Memex", or whenever the user wants knowledge to accumulate across sessions instead of being re-derived by RAG on every query.
skill-master
IncludedAgent Skills authoring, evaluation, and optimization. Create, edit, validate, benchmark, and improve skills following the agentskills.io specification. Use when designing SKILL.md files, structuring skill folders (references, scripts, assets), ingesting external documentation into skills, running trigger evals, benchmarking skill quality, optimizing descriptions, or performing blind A/B comparisons. Keywords: agentskills.io, SKILL.md, skill authoring, eval, benchmark, trigger optimization.