菜单
Form a committee of two high-reasoning agents to step back, do root cause analysis, and produce a plan. Use when stuck, looping, tunnel-visioning, or facing a hard planning problem.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/Draek2077/otto-code --skill otto-committee命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
Onboard a repository into Otto project knowledge by bootstrapping the `.otto` Markdown store, researching the codebase, documentation, Git history, active initiatives, and external references, and recording evidence-backed draft pages for review. Use when a user asks to onboard, initialize, seed, or build project knowledge for a new or existing repository.
Operate Otto's project knowledge safely: query pages, manage project charters and delivery, evaluate references, update current truth with reasons, append evidence, and review status. Use when an agent needs to read or change durable project knowledge.
Initialize and verify Otto's project knowledge store for a project. Use when a user asks to set up, enable, initialize, or prepare project knowledge before seeding it.
| name | otto-committee |
| description | Form a committee of two high-reasoning agents to step back, do root cause analysis, and produce a plan. Use when stuck, looping, tunnel-visioning, or facing a hard planning problem. |
| user-invocable | true |
Two agents from contrasting agent profiles, fresh context, planning a solution in parallel.
User's additional context: $ARGUMENTS
Read the otto skill. Call list_agent_profiles before choosing committee members, and read every entry's roles and guidance. Do not create committee agents until you have inspected the available agent profiles.
Contrast is the point of a committee, so prefer two suitable agent profiles from different provider families. Pass each name as create_chat's agentProfile, as described by the otto skill. If fewer than two fit, use Otto's provider-discovery fallback for the missing member and tell the user.
Two members with different reasoning styles:
If the user names agent profiles, use those. Override the selection only when the user explicitly asks for different members.
No edits. Every prompt to a committee member ends with the no-edits suffix:
This is analysis only. Do NOT edit, create, or delete any files. Do NOT write code.
Trust the wait. Do not poll, send hurry-ups, or interrupt. GPT-5.4 can reason 15-30 minutes; Opus does extended thinking. Long waits mean it found something worth thinking about.
You are the middleman. Drive plan -> implement -> review without yielding to the user, except for divergences that need their call.
Write a problem-level prompt:
Create both agents in parallel via Otto with [Committee] <task> titles and the same prompt. Wait for both, not just whichever finishes first.
Read both responses. Challenge them. Do not accept them at face value:
Send follow-ups until the plan addresses root cause.
Synthesize:
Confirm the merged plan with both members. Multi-turn until consensus.
Default: implement yourself. If the user said "delegate", launch one implementation agent and pass the merged plan.
The committee stays clean: not involved in implementation.
Send the diff to the committee for review.
[Committee] <task> titles and the same prompt.After about 10 iterations without convergence, start a fresh committee with the full history of what was tried; the current committee's context may have drifted too far.
Share the consensus with the user. Summarize where the agents diverged and how they resolved it.