Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
The War Room convenes multiple AI experts to analyze problems from diverse perspectives, challenge assumptions through adversarial review, and synthesize optimal approaches under the guidance of a Supreme Commander.
Philosophy
"The trick is that there is no trick. The power of intelligence stems from our vast diversity, not from any single, perfect principle."
Marvin Minsky, Society of Mind
Reversibility-Based Routing
Before deliberation, assess the Reversibility Score (RS) to determine appropriate resource allocation:
RS = (Reversal Cost + Time Lock-In + Blast Radius + Information Loss + Reputation Impact) / 25
RS Range
Type
Mode
Resources
0.04 - 0.40
Type 2
Express
1 expert, < 2 min
0.41 - 0.60
Type 1B
Lightweight
3 experts, 5-10 min
0.61 - 0.80
Type 1A
Full Council
7 experts, 15-30 min
0.81 - 1.00
Type 1A+
Delphi
7 experts, 30-60 min
Quick Heuristics:
Can be A/B tested? → Type 2
Requires data migration? → Type 1
Public commitment required? → Type 1A+
See modules/reversibility-assessment.md for full scoring guide.
When To Use
Architectural decisions with major trade-offs
Multi-stakeholder problems requiring diverse perspectives
High-stakes choices with significant consequences (RS > 0.60)
Novel problems without clear precedent
When brainstorming produces multiple strong competing approaches
Single obvious approach with no meaningful trade-offs
Low complexity with well-documented pattern
User explicitly declines after seeing RS assessment
# Automatic invocation from brainstorm (do not skip)
/attune:war-room --from-brainstorm
# Direct invocation (standalone)
/attune:war-room "Should we use microservices or monolith for this system?"
The War Room produces a Supreme Commander Decision document:
## SUPREME COMMANDER DECISION: {session_id}
### Reversibility Assessment
| Dimension | Score | Rationale |
|-----------|-------|-----------|
| Reversal Cost | X/5 | ... |
| Time Lock-In | X/5 | ... |
| Blast Radius | X/5 | ... |
| Information Loss | X/5 | ... |
| Reputation Impact | X/5 | ... |
**RS: 0.XX | Type: [1A+/1A/1B/2] | Mode: [delphi/full_council/lightweight/express]**
### Decision
**Selected Approach**: [Name]
### Rationale
[Why this approach was selected]
### Implementation Orders
1. [ ] Immediate actions
2. [ ] Short-term actions
### Watch Points
[From Premortem - what to monitor]
### Reversal Plan (for Type 1 decisions)
[If this decision proves wrong, here's the exit strategy]
### Dissenting Views
[For the record]
Session Artifacts
Saved to Strategeion:
Intelligence reports
Situation assessment
All COAs (with full attribution after unsealing)
Red Team challenges
Premortem analysis
Final decision
Record the Tradeoff (decision journal)
The Supreme Commander Decision is a tradeoff record by construction: a selected
approach, the COAs weighed against it, and the dissenting views. Mirror it into
docs/tradeoffs.md so the reasoning stays with the code, not only in
Strategeion (draft and confirm):
If leyline is installed, invoke Skill(leyline:decision-journal) and append
a tradeoff entry. Map directly: Selected Approach to decision, the RS and
rationale to a Y-statement, the rejected COAs to options, and Dissenting
Views to consequences_negative. Set phase to the originating phase (for
example plan). Record the RS in the entry links. Append on confirmation.
Fallback (leyline absent): append to docs/tradeoffs.md using the in-file
ENTRY TEMPLATE; assign the next TR-NNN id.
If the decision is architectural enough to warrant a numbered ADR in
docs/adr/, write the ADR and reference its number from the tradeoff entry
rather than duplicating it.
Anonymization
Expert contributions are anonymized during deliberation using Merkle-DAG:
Responses labeled as "Response A, B, C..." during review
Attribution revealed only after decision is made
Hash verification ensures integrity
See modules/merkle-dag.md for details.
Escalation
Automatic (Reversibility-Based)
Deliberation mode is automatically selected based on Reversibility Score:
RS Score
Automatic Mode
≤ 0.40
Express (bypass full War Room)
0.41 - 0.60
Lightweight panel
0.61 - 0.80
Full Council
> 0.80
Full Council and Delphi
Manual Override
The Supreme Commander may override automatic classification when:
High complexity detected (multiple architectural trade-offs)
Significant disagreement between initial experts
Novel problem domain requiring specialized analysis
Precedent-setting decision (future decisions will follow pattern)
When --agent-teams is specified (or auto-selected for Full Council / Delphi modes), the War Room uses Claude Code Agent Teams instead of sequential conjure delegation. Each expert runs as a persistent teammate with bidirectional messaging, enabling real-time deliberation instead of batch request/response cycles.
Requires: Claude Code 2.1.32+, CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1, tmux installed.
When Agent Teams Helps
Mode
Without Agent Teams
With Agent Teams
Benefit
Express
Sonnet direct call
N/A (overkill)
None: skip
Lightweight
3 sequential delegations
N/A (overhead exceeds benefit)
None: skip
Full Council
7 sequential/parallel delegations
7 teammates with live inbox messaging
Experts can react to each other's COAs in real-time
Delphi
Multiple delegation rounds
Persistent team iterates until convergence
No re-invocation cost per round; state preserved across rounds
Rule of thumb: Use agent teams only for Full Council and Delphi modes. Lightweight and Express modes don't generate enough inter-expert traffic to justify the coordination overhead.
Note: In agent teams mode, all teammates run as Claude Code instances (Opus/Sonnet/Haiku). External LLM experts (Gemini, Qwen, GLM) are not used because agent teams requires the Claude CLI. The trade-off is losing model diversity but gaining real-time inter-expert messaging.
Deliberation Flow with Agent Teams
Lead creates team → spawns teammates in tmux panes
Phase 1 (Intel): Lead assigns intel tasks to scout and intel-officer via inbox
Phase 3 (COA): Lead broadcasts situation assessment; teammates develop COAs independently; messaging allows clarifying questions mid-development
Phase 4 (Red Team): Red-team teammate receives all COAs, posts challenges; other teammates can respond to challenges in real-time
Phase 5 (Voting): Lead broadcasts ballot; teammates rank via inbox messages
Phase 6 (Premortem): All teammates receive selected COA; can build on each other's failure scenarios
Phase 7 (Synthesis): Lead collects all artifacts, produces decision
Phase 8 (Discussion Publishing): After the
Supreme Commander Decision document is finalized,
you MUST execute modules/discussion-publishing.md
to publish the decision to GitHub Discussions.
Publishing is the default. The user can decline
with "n". See the "Discussion Publishing (REQUIRED)"
section below for the full step-by-step workflow.
Falling Back to Conjure Delegation
If agent teams fails (tmux unavailable, team creation error), the War Room automatically falls back to standard conjure delegation. The deliberation protocol is identical: only the execution backend differs.
Cost Considerations
Agent teams is significantly more token-intensive than conjure delegation (each teammate maintains its own context window). Use only when the coordination value justifies the cost, typically Delphi mode where multiple rounds of revision make persistent teammates worthwhile.
Discussion Publishing (REQUIRED)
After Phase 7 synthesis completes (in any execution
mode), you MUST execute the discussion publishing
workflow. This is not optional unless the user
explicitly declines.
Execute these steps in order:
Read modules/discussion-publishing.md for the
full GraphQL workflow
Ask the user: "Publishing this decision to GitHub
Discussions. [Y/n]"
If the user says "n", skip to Related Skills.
Otherwise proceed with steps 4-6.
Run the gh api graphql commands from the module
to create a Discussion in the "Decisions" category
Post phase summaries as threaded comments on the
Discussion
Update the local strategeion file with the
Discussion URL
If GitHub Discussions are unavailable (non-GitHub
platform, Discussions disabled, gh not authenticated),
warn the user and skip. Publishing failures never
block the war room workflow.
Exit Criteria
A Reversibility Score and decision type are computed and recorded.
A Supreme Commander Decision document with a selected approach,
rationale, and dissenting views is produced.
The decision is mirrored to docs/tradeoffs.md (and to a numbered ADR
in docs/adr/ if architectural).
Premortem watch points and, for Type 1 decisions, a reversal plan are
captured.
