Hire an AI advisory decision review planner

Everything it can hand back

Your task sets the actual outputs. The specialist picks the methods that cover them.

• The council's recommended decision and its strongest dissent
• What would change the call, and the first three steps
• A list of ways your plan could fail, with a change for each
• A short team note with the owner, the signal, the review date and each doubt on record

How it does the job well

• Clarify the purpose, audience and limits, such as length, format and deadline, first.
• Use the user's materials and voice. Ask for samples when tone matters.
• Be specific and concrete. Cut what does not serve the purpose.
• Say what you are unsure of and where to check it.

Mistakes it avoids

• Generic output that ignores the user's details.
• Inventing facts, quotes or sources.
• Long answers when a short one was asked for.

What a good result looks like

An example, not your task: You face a real choice with a cost to getting it wrong.

• Council brief. The council's call, its strongest dissent, what would change the call and the first three steps.
• Failure check. Ways the plan could fail, survival risks first, and a change to the plan for each.
• Commit note. Each doubt on record, who decides any clash, the owner, the signal to watch and the review date.
• HAND-BACK SUMMARY. Each step's file, any step not run and why, and every MISSING line in one list.

How the work is checked

• Each step passed its own checks, or the run stopped at the step that failed and says why.
• The steps ran in order, and each one used the result of the one before.
• Nothing was invented to fill a gap. Every gap is a MISSING: line.
• Nothing was sent, published or paid for without a clear yes.
• States which checks passed, failed or could not run, and names missing inputs.

These checks have not been run against a model yet. Your AI uses them to check its own work.

A second opinion

Before it hands back, your AI reviews the draft the way Niccolò Machiavelli and Andrej Karpathy would. This is a way of reviewing the work. It does not mean they wrote or endorse it.

Capabilities

• Run the council. Seats the minds, lets each one answer from their seat, has them challenge each other and rank the answers blind, then writes the brief with the call and the strongest dissent.
• Pause, then write your plan. You turn the call and the first three steps into a dated plan, with one owner per step.
• Try to break the plan. Lists what would guarantee failure, checks the plan against each, puts survival risks first and sets people to attack it on purpose.
• Write the commit note. Writes each doubt as one fair line, sorts it as a difference of view or a clash of aims, names who decides a clash and drafts the note with owner, signal and review date.

How the role works

1. Checks your task, context and available tools.
2. Picks the methods needed and prepares a work plan.
3. Carries out supported tasks, with each method's limits and review gates.
4. Checks the real deliverables and corrects supported faults.
5. Hands back files, evidence and unresolved gaps.

Your specialist's working setup

Download the base specialist without a task form or account. README.md and SETUP.md explain how to use the folder. SOUL.md defines its scope. INTAKE.md asks missing questions inside your AI. PLAYBOOK.md, SKILLS.md, BEST_PRACTICES.md, CHECKS.md and HANDOFF.md guide the work and its checked deliverables.

Complete associated skills, supporting files and licences are included. Choose only the methods needed for the actual task. Keep context, working files and accepted feedback in your AI project.

Use this specialist through MCP or the API

Call prepare_specialist with role_id settle-a-hard-decision-with-a-council-then-commit-the-team only. No task is required to load it. Your AI asks what job you need done, what you want back and which relevant context it can use.

For task-led hiring, call find_specialist, explain the suggested specialists and let the user accept or change the team.

Complete ZIP: Download base specialist. API: GET /api/v1/specialists/settle-a-hard-decision-with-a-council-then-commit-the-team/pack. The host AI supplies its own model, tools and execution; a pack does not connect accounts or run a task.

Inputs and helpful context

The specialist starts from the task brief. Only active methods require their inputs.

For the primary method, when used

• The decision, the options and what a good outcome looks like
• Hard limits, such as money, time or values
• Who disagrees and why, in a line each (optional)
• Your brand file or business facts (optional)

Tools and access

• Claude Code: Each member can run as its own subagent, reading its own mind file, so the voices stay apart.
• Any good chat AI: One model plays every member in turn. Use your strongest model for this one.
• Any good chat AI: Listing and testing failure modes is text reasoning that any strong chat AI handles with this skill.
• A spreadsheet: Handy for putting numbers on dependencies, cash and runway.
• Any good chat AI: Writing fair summaries of views and a short team note is text work any strong chat AI does well with this skill.

Functions and deliverables

• Advisory decision review planner: Share the decision, evidence and constraints. Get simulated advisory views, dissent, a checked action plan and a draft team decision note.
  • The council's recommended decision and its strongest dissent
  • What would change the call, and the first three steps
  • A list of ways your plan could fail, with a change for each
  • A short team note with the owner, the signal, the review date and each doubt on record
• Council decision brief writer: Get an advisory council of great minds to argue your hard decision. You get a brief with the call, the strongest dissent and your first three steps.
  • The council, with each member's seat and the question they always ask
  • An opening view from each member, then a round of challenges
  • A blind ranking of the answers
  • The chair's brief, with the decision, the strongest dissent, what would change the call and the first three steps
• Plan failure reviewer: Find the ways your plan could fail before you commit. Paste your plan and goal, and get ranked failure risks with a fix for each.
  • The goal in one line
  • A list of failure modes specific to your plan, survival risks first
  • A change to the plan for each failure
  • The bet stated, and a set of attacks for the people you pick to argue against it
• Team decision and dissent note writer: Share a decision and each person’s reasons. Record doubts fairly, name the decision owner and draft actions, signals and a review date.
  • One fair line of dissent per person, including the boss if they disagree
  • Each dissent sorted as a difference of view or a clash of aims
  • A named decider, a time limit and what each side brings, if the aims clash
  • A commit line each person says back, with an action in it
  • A signal that would show the decision is wrong, and a review date
  • A short note for the team
• me.md builder: Answer a few questions, or let your AI use what it remembers. Get one private file that tells any AI who you are.
  • One me.md file with up to ten dated sections
  • A list of facts taken from memory, for you to check
  • A short note of what it removed for privacy
  • The two next steps, to save it and set it up
• Niccolò Machiavelli: Map power and risks using Niccolò Machiavelli’s recorded approach. Check who can act, what each person wants and what to do if plans fail.
  • Your problem worked on the way Niccolò Machiavelli would: their questions, their method, their push-back
  • The answer or the work, in Niccolò Machiavelli's voice, using their ideas by name
  • Anything that goes beyond their public record, marked
  • One suggested next step
• Andrej Karpathy: Debug an AI project or learn a hard idea using Andrej Karpathy’s recorded approach. Inspect real examples, start small and check each change.
  • Your problem worked on the way Andrej Karpathy would: their questions, their method, their push-back
  • The answer or the work, in Andrej Karpathy's voice, using their ideas by name
  • Anything that goes beyond their public record, marked
  • One suggested next step

Tasks you can use it for

• You face a real choice with a cost to getting it wrong.
• The team is split and the same argument keeps coming back.
• You are the boss and disagree with a call the team wants to make.

Limits to check before starting

• You have a choice with one right answer. Check the facts or ask the person who knows the field.
• You can undo the choice in a day. Just try it, then review it, or run the Council decision brief writer once on its own.
• You need to plan the work after the choice is made. Use a simple task list with an owner and a date for each step.

Best way to use this role

Give it one clear outcome, the actual files and a definition of done. Keep the work in one AI project so it can reuse checked context and earlier files.

• Download the handoff pack. It's a zip with HANDOFF.md and every skill file this workflow uses.
• Give the folder to Claude (in Claude Code, or as files in a Claude Project) and say "Follow HANDOFF.md".
• Describe the decision, the options and what is at stake. Name the minds you want, or let it pick.
• When it pauses, turn the brief's decision and first three steps into a dated plan with an owner for each step.
• Add each person's real view before the last step, so the note records what they said.

Read it as data

Read the complete role setup as JSON. Connect your AI to the AI Blocks MCP library and read aiblocks://roles/settle-a-hard-decision-with-a-council-then-commit-the-team for its role instructions and pinned sources.

This is a prepared AI role. No task has run. Your AI carries out authorized work using its available tools and reports the actual deliverables and checks.