Skill: yx2601816404-sys/parliament (version 1.0.0)

--- name: parliament description: Multi-model collaboration skill. Spawns parallel sub-agents using different LLM models to review, analyze, or debate a given task. Collects and synthesizes outputs into a unified report. Use when you need diverse model perspectives on code review, document analysis, decision-making, or any task that benefits from multi-model consensus. --- # Parliament — Multi-Model Collaboration Spawn parallel sub-agents across different LLM models, collect their outputs, and synthesize a unified report. Like a parliament where each model is a delegate with its own perspective. ## When to Use - Code review from multiple model perspectives - Document/paper review with diverse viewpoints - Decision-making that benefits from consensus - Quality assurance through model disagreement detection - Any task where "second opinions" from different models add value ## Inputs | Parameter | Required | Default | Description | |-----------|----------|---------|-------------| | task | yes | — | The review prompt or question | | content | yes | — | File path or inline text to review | | models | no | all 4 | Comma-separated model aliases | | timeout | no | 120s | Max seconds per delegate | | mode | no | review | `review`, `debate`, or `quick` | ## Available Models | Alias | Full Model ID | Emoji | Strengths | |-------|--------------|-------|-----------| | `opus46` | `anthropic/claude-opus-4-6` | 🟣 | Deep reasoning, nuanced analysis | | `gpt53` | `openai/gpt-5.3-codex` | 🟢 | Code analysis, structured output | | `gemini` | `google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview` | 🔵 | Broad reasoning, multimodal | | `glm5` | `glm/claude-opus-4-6` | 🟡 | GLM-5 via MMKG routing | ⚠️ Model availability depends on configured API keys. Parliament gracefully handles unavailable models (see Error Handling). ⚠️ GLM-5 model ID is `glm/claude-opus-4-6` — the `glm/` prefix routes through MMKG, NOT Anthropic direct. Default parliament: all 4 models. Quick mode: opus46 + one other. ## Execution Protocol When the user asks for a parliament review, follow these steps exactly: ### Step 1: Prepare the Delegate Prompt Read the file (if a path is given), then construct the delegate prompt: ``` You are one delegate in a multi-model parliament review. Other models are reviewing the same content independently. Your role: Give your honest, thorough, independent analysis. Do not hedge or be diplomatic — be direct. Task: {user's prompt} Content to review: {file content or inline content} Structure your response as: 1. **Key Observations** — what stands out immediately 2. **Issues Found** — bugs, risks, gaps, errors (with severity: high/medium/low) 3. **Strengths** — what's done well 4. **Recommendations** — specific, actionable improvements 5. **Confidence** — your overall confidence level (high/medium/low) with reasoning ``` ### Step 2: Spawn All Delegates in Parallel Use `sessions_spawn` for each model. Spawn ALL at once (do not wait sequentially): ``` sessions_spawn( task=<delegate prompt>, model="anthropic/claude-opus-4-6", label="parliament-opus46", mode="run", runTimeoutSeconds=120 ) ``` Labels: `parliament-opus46`, `parliament-gpt53`, `parliament-gemini`, `parliament-glm5`. ### Step 3: Collect Results Sub-agents auto-announce when done. As each result arrives, note it. Proceed to synthesis when: - All delegates have returned, OR - Timeout reached and at least 2 delegates responded ### Step 4: Synthesize (Host Agent Does This) The host agent (you) produces the final Parliament Report by comparing all delegate outputs: **How to identify consensus:** Points raised by 3+ delegates with similar conclusions. **How to identify divergence:** Points where delegates reach different conclusions or assign different severity. **How to identify unique insights:** Points raised by only 1 delegate that others missed. **How to derive recommendation:** Weight by consensus strength. If 3/4 agree, follow the majority. If split 2/2, present both positions and recommend the more conservative option. ### Step 5: Deliver Report Output the report in this format: ```markdown # 🏛️ Parliament Report **Task:** {summary} **Models:** {list of models that responded} **Date:** {timestamp} **Quorum:** {N}/{total} delegates responded --- ## Delegate Responses ### 🟣 Opus 4.6 {response} ### 🟢 GPT-5.3 Codex {response} ### 🔵 Gemini 3.1 Pro {response} ### 🟡 GLM-5 {response} --- ## Synthesis ### ✅ Consensus (3+ delegates agree) - {point 1} - {point 2} ### ⚠️ Divergence (delegates disagree) - {topic}: {model A} says X, {model B} says Y - Recommendation: {which position and why} ### 💡 Unique Insights (only one delegate caught this) - {model}: {insight} ### 📊 Confidence Matrix | Model | Confidence | Top Concern | |-------|-----------|-------------| | Opus 4.6 | high/med/low | ... | | GPT-5.3 | high/med/low | ... | | Gemini | high/med/low | ... | | GLM-5 | high/med/low | ... | ### 📋 Final Recommendation {synthesized recommendation based on weighted consensus} ``` ## Error Handling | Scenario | Action | |----------|--------| | Model API key not configured | Skip model, note in report as "❌ unavailable (no API key)" | | Model times out | Note as "⏱️ timed out", proceed with available results | | Model returns error | Note error, proceed with available results | | Only 1 delegate responds | Deliver single response with note: "⚠️ Insufficient quorum for synthesis" | | 0 delegates respond | Report failure, suggest checking API keys with `/status` | Minimum quorum for synthesis: 2 delegates. ## Modes ### Review Mode (default) Independent analysis from each model. Best for code review, document review, architecture decisions. ### Quick Mode Only 2 models (opus46 + gemini). Faster, still catches most issues. Use when time matters more than breadth. ### Debate Mode Frame the task as a debate: "Take a strong position and argue for it." Synthesis highlights strongest arguments from each side. Best for decision-making with tradeoffs. ## Permissions - `sessions_spawn` — spawn sub-agent sessions with different models - `read` — read files for review (when file paths provided) - `write` — save the parliament report (optional) ## Tips - Parliament works best with specific, concrete tasks (not vague "review everything") - For large files (>500 lines), split into sections and run parliament on each - Pay special attention to divergence points — that's where the real value is - If one model consistently disagrees, investigate why — it may have caught something others missed - Check model availability first (`/status`) if you're unsure which API keys are configured


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis:  | VirusTotal:  | SkillSpector:  ()