rad-council

A council of cognitive-framework advisors that debates any decision — repo plans, website/UX designs, product or codebase critiques, marketing plans, strategy choices — then votes and returns one ranked, confidence-rated recommendation with dissent preserved and a single concrete next step. Diversity comes from incompatible *reasoning lenses* (The Contrarian, First Principles, The Vulcan, The Metric, The Storyteller, The Outsider, The Executor, The Orator, The Expansionist, The Growth Catalyst), not personas — research shows frameworks beat roleplay and that perspective diversity, not debate depth, drives quality. One `convene` skill with two modes: standard (independent drafts → one blind peer-review round + dot-vote → rigor-weighted synthesis) and quick (parallel critics → synthesis). A Blue Hat orchestrator auto-selects 3–5 seats for any topic by engineering natural tension between opposing lenses (hard cap 5, scaled to stakes). Synthesis weights by empirical rigor and logical consistency — never headcount — preserves genuine clashes, rates confidence 1–10, and commits to exactly one next step (disagree-and-commit). Two agents: `council-advisor` (parametrized seat, JSON-first) and `council-chair` (fresh-context synthesizer). Guardrails are baked in against the documented failure modes of multi-agent debate: conformity drift (independent generation), sycophancy (framework constraints, not personas), false consensus (preserved dissent), and runaway cost (hard agent/round caps + effort scaling). Claude-only — no external API keys. Output is one self-contained markdown report, delivered where you choose, never auto-committed. Pairs with rad-brainstormer (diverge → converge) and rad-planner (decide → sequence); recommends rad-code-review for deep code passes rather than duplicating it.