Install
$ agentstack add skill-pamiray-m-the-board-the-board ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README — it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming — see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps — measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
The Board — multi-archetype decision review
A standing advisory board of distinct expert archetypes that reviews a decision from several opposed viewpoints and returns one aggregated verdict: PROCEED, CONCERN, or BLOCK — with each member's reasoning, the key risks, and the conditions that would change the call.
The archetypes are composite lenses (The Frontier Scientist, The Ruthless Operator, The CFO, The Safety & Alignment Reviewer, The Contrarian, …). They do not impersonate any real person — that is deliberate, both for integrity and to keep the skill clean to use and share.
When to use
Invoke this skill when the task is a judgment call, not a lookup:
- "Should we build / ship / fund / kill X?"
- "Is this a good idea?" / "Give me a second opinion."
- "Review this plan / strategy / architecture / launch."
- "Red-team this." / "Run a pre-mortem." / "What could go wrong?"
- Any go/no-go where multiple perspectives matter.
Skip it for factual lookups, simple how-tos, or tasks with one obviously-correct answer.
How to run a consultation
The script is deterministic (routing + tallying). You are the board — you adopt each archetype's doctrine and produce its verdict. Three steps:
1. Pick the panel and read the doctrines
python3 scripts/board.py panel --decision --topic ""
--decision is one of general | venture | technical | launch | risk | all (aliases like gtm, architecture, safety are accepted; unknown → general; all convenes every archetype). This prints each selected archetype's doctrine and focus questions, plus the verdict schema.
2. Produce one verdict per archetype
For each archetype in the panel, reason strictly from its doctrine and focus questions — stay in character, be specific to the decision, and avoid boilerplate. Emit one object per archetype:
{
"member": "strategist",
"verdict": "PROCEED | CONCERN | BLOCK",
"confidence": 0.0,
"reasoning": "one or two sentences, specific to the decision",
"key_risk": "the single biggest risk this archetype sees (or empty)",
"key_condition": "what would change this verdict (or empty)"
}
Collect them into a JSON array (write it to verdicts.json, or pipe it).
3. Aggregate into the board's verdict
python3 scripts/board.py aggregate --file verdicts.json
Aggregation rules (deterministic):
- Any
BLOCK→ overall BLOCK. - Strict majority
CONCERN-or-worse → overall CONCERN. - Otherwise → PROCEED.
- Confidence = mean of member confidences. Key risks and conditions are surfaced
from the dissenting members.
Then present the board's verdict to the user: the headline call, the tally, each member's one-line take, and the key risks / conditions. Be honest — if the board says CONCERN or BLOCK, lead with that.
Decision types → panels
| --decision | Panel focus | |---|---| | general (default) | Balanced go/no-go: Strategist, Operator, Safety, CFO, Contrarian | | venture | New product/business: Frontier Scientist, Operator, Strategist, CFO, Product Truth-Teller | | technical | Approach/architecture: Research Skeptic, Systems Architect, Safety, Frontier Scientist, Contrarian | | launch | Go-to-market: Operator, Growth Lead, Customer Advocate, Strategist, Compliance Counsel | | risk | Safety/compliance: Safety Reviewer, Compliance Counsel, Contrarian, Systems Architect | | all | The full board (every archetype) |
python3 scripts/board.py roster lists every archetype.
Tips
- Match the panel to the question; use
allfor a high-stakes, irreversible call. - Make the archetypes genuinely disagree — the value is in the tension, not consensus.
- For your own org, you can add archetypes to
data/archetypes.jsonor new panels to
data/routing.json (still: archetypes, not real people).
The Board is an open-source skill by AOS-1 — an operating system for trustworthy, governed AI. Multi-perspective decision review is the same discipline AOS-1 applies to autonomous agents.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: pamiray-m
- Source: pamiray-m/the-board
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://aos-1.com
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.