| name | openclaw-council |
| description | Stress-test OpenClaw architecture or production-config changes with an isolated council pass, contradiction check, and independent Codex review. Use when autonomy, reliability, fallbacks, or deployment risk make a one-pass answer too weak. |
OpenClaw Council
Metadata
- Trigger when: an OpenClaw design or config change is serious enough to deserve multi-pass review before go-live.
- Do not use when: the change is a quick tweak with no real autonomy, reliability, or rollback risk.
Skill Purpose
Run three independent review surfaces so risky OpenClaw plans get contradiction checks, blind-spot reduction, and an explicit go/no-go gate before production changes land.
Instructions
- Write a short draft plan first so every reviewer sees the same concrete proposal. Keep the plan focused on the actual architecture or config change under review.
- Run the isolated OpenClaw council pass, the contradiction-auditor pass, and the separate
codex exec review. Use /Users/nick/.codex/skills/openclaw-council/references/prompt-pack.md when you need the exact review prompts or setup details.
- Merge and deduplicate the findings into one revised plan with clear critical issues, contradictions, go/no-go guidance, and the gates that must close before the change is safe to apply.
Non-Negotiable Acceptance Criteria
- All three review passes complete before risky production config changes are treated as approved.
- Preview models, proxies, and multi-provider fallbacks are treated as higher-risk until proven stable.
- The revised plan includes rollback and synthetic health checks.
- The final answer distinguishes merged consensus from unresolved contradiction.
Output
- Critical findings first.
- A contradiction section naming hidden dependencies or incompatible assumptions.
- A revised plan and a go/no-go recommendation with explicit gates before go-live.
