# Expert

> ALWAYS invoke when the user wants a multi-sided expert critique of an idea. Triggers:"expert review of","consult experts on","critique this idea","multi-angle analysis","strengths and weaknesses of". Provide the idea as the argument.

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-doctormozg-claude-pipelines-expert`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [DoctorMozg](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/doctormozg)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [DoctorMozg](https://github.com/DoctorMozg)
- **Source:** https://github.com/DoctorMozg/claude-pipelines/tree/master/plugins/mz-creative/skills/expert

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-doctormozg-claude-pipelines-expert
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# Expert Consultation Pipeline

## Overview

You orchestrate a Delphi-style expert panel review. A curated panel of 5 lenses — selected from 16 available perspectives — critiques an idea over **3 fixed rounds**. Each round every panelist emits a structured 5-field view (strengths/weaknesses/risks/suggestions/confidence); a neutral round synthesizer consolidates the outputs; the next round's panelists receive the summary plus their own prior view and may alter their position. After round 3, a dedicated report writer produces a multi-sided analysis report.

## When to Use

Invoke when the user wants a critical, multi-lens analysis of a specific proposal, plan, architecture, business idea, or design decision. Trigger phrases: "expert review of", "critique this idea", "strengths and weaknesses of", "multi-angle analysis", "consult experts on".

### When NOT to use

- The user wants to generate ideas from scratch — use `brainstorm`.
- The user wants a single concrete decision or implementation — use `build`.
- The user wants verification of an existing codebase change — use `audit` or `review-branch`.
- The problem has one objectively correct answer knowable from docs — look it up instead of consulting a panel.

## Input

`$ARGUMENTS` — The idea, proposal, or plan to review. Supports inline modifiers:

- `scope:branch|global|working` — when set, `expert-researcher` scans the codebase first so experts can ground feedback in real code (default: pure idea analysis, no scan)
- `@doc:` — existing requirement/brief/RFC document to ingest

If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty, ask the user via `AskUserQuestion`. Never guess.

## Constants

- **PANEL_SIZE**: 5
- **TOTAL_LENSES**: 16
- **ROUNDS**: 3 (fixed — no early stopping, no convergence check)
- **TASK_DIR**: `.mz/task/`
- **REPORT_DIR**: `.mz/reports/`

## Available Lenses

Panel picks 5 from 16 lenses: `lens-engineer`, `lens-artist`, `lens-philosopher`, `lens-mathematician`, `lens-scientist`, `lens-economist`, `lens-storyteller`, `lens-futurist`, `lens-psychologist`, `lens-historian`, `lens-cto`, `lens-seo`, `lens-security`, `lens-product`, `lens-devops`, `lens-data`.
Use the brief to balance primary, adjacent, and productive-tension lenses. Behavior is injected by this skill (critique mode); the same lens agents serve `/brainstorm` in ideation mode.

## Core Process

### Phase Overview

| #   | Phase                              | File                                                      | Loop?                        |
| --- | ---------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------- |
| 0   | Setup                              | inline below                                              | —                            |
| 1   | Intake + Optional Research + Panel | `phases/intake_and_panel.md`                              | —                            |
| 1.5 | Panel Approval Gate                | Inline below (+ `phases/intake_and_panel.md` for details) | user-feedback sub-loop       |
| 2   | Round Loop                         | `phases/round_loop.md`                                    | fixed 3 rounds, no early-out |
| 3   | Final Report                       | `phases/final_report.md`                                  | —                            |

### Phase 0: Setup

1. Parse `$ARGUMENTS`. Extract brief, `scope:`, `@doc:` refs.
1. If brief is empty → `AskUserQuestion`. Never guess.
1. `task_name` = `_expert_` where `` is today's date (underscores) and slug is a snake_case summary (max 20 chars); on same-day collision append `_v2`, `_v3`.
1. Create `.mz/task//`.
1. Write `state.md` with `schema_version: 2`, `Status`, `Phase`, `Started`, `phase_complete: false`, `what_remains: []`, `Round: 0`, `FilesWritten: []`.
1. Emit a visible setup block: `task_name`, working dir, report dir, detected modifiers.

### Phase 1.5: Panel Approval Gate

**This orchestrator** (not a subagent) presents this gate. This step is interactive and must not be delegated.

**Pre-read**: Read `.mz/task//panel.md` and capture the full contents (5 selected panelist lenses with one-line rationale per pick — primary, adjacent, productive-tension picks all justified) into context. See `phases/intake_and_panel.md` Step 1.4 for the panel.md content schema.

**Surface 1 — emit the plan message.** Output the full verbatim contents of `.mz/task//panel.md` as a normal markdown chat message. Emit the full verbatim contents — do not substitute a path, summary, or placeholder. Structure:

```
## Panel ready for review — expert

/panel.md>

---
**Approve** → begin 3 rounds of expert critique  ·  **Reject** → cancel task, no rounds will run  ·  reply with feedback to revise
```

**Surface 2 — call AskUserQuestion.** After the plan message, call AskUserQuestion. The question must NOT re-embed the panel — it lives in the plan message above.

- question: `The panel above is ready for review.`
- options: **Approve** — begin 3 rounds of expert critique · **Reject** — cancel task, no rounds will run

**Response handling**:

- **Approve** → update `state.md` to `panel_approved`, proceed to Phase 2 (Round Loop).
- **Reject** → update `state.md` to `aborted_by_user` and stop. Do not run rounds.
- **Any other reply (feedback)** → apply swaps/changes, overwrite `panel.md`, return to Surface 1, re-read `panel.md`, and re-emit the entire plan message from scratch with the full new contents — never diff-only, never summary-only, since context compaction may have destroyed the user's memory of earlier iterations. This is a loop — repeat until the user explicitly approves. Never proceed to Phase 2 without explicit approval.

## Techniques

Techniques: delegated to phase files — see Phase Overview table above.

## Common Rationalizations

N/A — collaboration/reference skill, not a discipline skill.

## Red Flags

- You skipped the panel-approval gate.
- You exited the round loop before 3 rounds completed.
- You serialized the 5 panelists instead of dispatching in one parallel message per round.
- You let a panelist write `round__summary.md` instead of dispatching `expert-round-synthesizer`.
- You wrote the final report inline instead of dispatching `expert-report-writer`.
- The final report has claims not attributed to a specific panelist + round.

## Verification

At the end of Phase 3, output a visible block:

```
Expert consultation finalized.
Task dir:   .mz/task//
Report:     .mz/reports/_expert_.md
Panel:      
Rounds:     3/3
Files:
  - intake.md
  - research.md (if scope: set)
  - panel.md
  - iter_1_.md × 5, round_1_summary.md
  - iter_2_.md × 5, round_2_summary.md
  - iter_3_.md × 5, round_3_summary.md
  - final report at .mz/reports/
```

If any phase is incomplete, print the blocker explicitly. The verification block is mandatory.

## Error Handling

- Empty brief → `AskUserQuestion`; never guess.
- `@doc:` path does not exist → ask the user whether to proceed without it.
- Agent returns malformed output → retry once with clarified prompt; if still malformed, note the gap in state.md and continue (do not block the round on a single agent).
- Researcher fails when `scope:` set → escalate to user; offer to proceed without scan.
- Panel-approval gate rejected → mark state `aborted_by_user`; stop without writing a report.
- Update `state.md` before and after every agent dispatch.

## State Management

After each phase, update `.mz/task//state.md`:

- `Status:` `pending` | `running` | `complete` | `aborted_by_user` | `failed`
- `Phase:` `0` | `1` | `1.5` | `2` | `3`
- `Round:` `0..3` (Phase 2 only)
- `FilesWritten:` cumulative list

State persists to `.mz/task//state.md`. Schema is **v2**: the file's first line is `schema_version: 2`, and alongside the skill's existing `Status` / `Phase` / `Started` keys it carries `phase_complete` (boolean) and `what_remains` (YAML list of strings). Set `phase_complete: false` on phase entry and `true` once the phase's artifacts are written and its gates pass; refresh `what_remains` on every phase transition; `what_remains` MUST be `[]` when `Status: complete`. On reading a `schema_version: 1` or unversioned file, add the missing keys, set `schema_version: 2`, and log the upgrade.

Never rely on conversation memory for cross-phase state — context compaction destroys specific paths and decisions. The state file is the source of truth.

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [DoctorMozg](https://github.com/DoctorMozg)
- **Source:** [DoctorMozg/claude-pipelines](https://github.com/DoctorMozg/claude-pipelines)
- **License:** MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-doctormozg-claude-pipelines-expert
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/doctormozg
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.