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.
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。
Hand off the current task to another agent with full context. Use when the user says "handoff", "hand off", "hand this to", or wants to pass work to another agent.
Paseo reference for managing agents and worktrees. Load whenever you need to create agents, send them prompts, or manage worktrees.
Cut a beta release of Paseo. Use when the user says "release beta", "cut a beta", "ship a beta", "beta release", or "/release-beta". Betas are release candidates on the beta channel — they carry an in-place changelog entry, don't move the website download target, and publish npm only on the beta dist-tag.
Spin up a single agent as an advisor — second opinion on the current task. Use when the user says "advisor", "second opinion", "what does X think", or wants an outside take without delegating the work itself.
Run an agent loop until an exit condition is met. Use when the user says "loop", "babysit", "keep trying until", "check every X", "watch", or wants iterative autonomous execution.
Cut a stable release of Paseo (fresh patch or promote from beta). Use when the user says "release stable", "ship stable", "promote", "release:patch", "release:promote", or "/release-stable".
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | paseo-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 providers, fresh context, planning a solution in parallel. They stay alive for review after implementation.
The purpose is to step back, not double down. The committee may propose a completely different approach.
User's additional context: $ARGUMENTS
Read the paseo skill. Before choosing committee members, read ~/.paseo/orchestration-preferences.json unless the user explicitly named providers in this request. Do not create committee agents until you have read it.
Contrast is the point of a committee, so pick across providers deliberately using the configured preferences rather than hardcoded defaults.
Two members with different reasoning styles, selected from orchestration preferences:
Override 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 Paseo with [Committee] <task> titles and the same prompt. Wait for both — not just whichever finishes first.
Read both responses. Challenge them — do not accept 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 impl agent and pass the merged plan.
The committee stays clean — not involved in implementation.
Send the diff to the committee:
Implementation is done. Review changes against the plan. Flag drift or missing pieces.
Apply feedback yourself, or send to the impl agent. Repeat 2 → 3 until consensus.
After ~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.