| name | ask-the-board |
| description | Loop through advisor profiles in knowledge/board/ and return a combined multi-persona critique of a spec, draft, or decision. |
Ask the Board
Input: a spec, draft, or decision to critique. Output: one combined critique
built from every advisor in knowledge/board/.
Procedure
- List the advisor folders in
knowledge/board/. If none have a
profile.md, stop and tell the user the board is empty (board content
arrives in Phase 3 via ingest) — do not improvise personas from thin air.
- For each advisor, read
profile.md plus any ingested source material, then
write a critique in that advisor's lens: what they'd push on, what
they'd cut, what they'd bet on. 3–6 bullets each. Ground every point in
their ingested material where possible and cite the file.
- Combine into one output:
- Per-seat critiques — one short section per advisor, clearly labelled.
- Convergence — what multiple seats agree on.
- Tensions — where seats disagree, stated as a real trade-off.
- Board verdict — a one-paragraph synthesis. Label it
[INFERENCE] — persona synthesis, not fact.
Rules
- Clone output is a lens, never truth. Every board response is labelled as
a persona critique and feeds the human approval gate — it never bypasses it.
- If an advisor's ingested material doesn't cover the topic, say so in their
section rather than fabricating their view.
