From autopilot
Facilitates multi-role debate (architect, ops, QA, product, UX, finance) for strategic decisions, tradeoff analysis, and risk assessment. Each role produces independent perspectives then cross-collides.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/autopilot:think-tankThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
> Routing overlap? If this intent better matches a sibling skill, redirect per [references/routing-tiebreaks.md](../../references/routing-tiebreaks.md) (prefer internal priority debate over external research).
references/brief-template.mdreferences/dialectic-brief-template.mdreferences/dialectic-mode.mdreferences/dialectic-role-prompts.mdreferences/epistemic-diversity-scorecard.mdreferences/minority-report.mdreferences/model-routing.mdreferences/problem-restate-gate.mdreferences/role-prompts.mdreferences/silent-pre-check.mdRouting overlap? If this intent better matches a sibling skill, redirect per references/routing-tiebreaks.md (prefer internal priority debate over external research).
!cat .claude/dispatch-config.md 2>/dev/null || true
6 specialized roles analyze the same topic in parallel, each producing independent perspectives, then cross-collide. Value lies in divergence, not consensus.
| Trigger | Example |
|---|---|
| Product/strategy decisions | "Should we build X?" "A or B first?" |
| Scope decisions | "How far do we go?" "What's in Phase 1?" |
| Tradeoff analysis | "Performance vs features vs maintenance cost" |
| Risk assessment | "What's the blast radius of this change?" |
| CEO Agent hits strategic decision | CEO autonomously invokes autopilot:think-tank |
Not for: pure technical selection (X library vs Y) → use autopilot:survey.
Escalation path: If R1 reveals LOW consensus (roles fundamentally disagree) AND the decision is irreversible or high-stakes, the Decision Brief will recommend escalating to autopilot:think-tank-dialectic for Hegelian cross-examination. Do not escalate for medium decisions — dialectic is expensive and only justified when genuine tension exists on an irreversible choice.
survey → external research (what does the industry do?)
think-tank → internal multi-perspective debate (what should WE do?) ← this skill
↓ (if LOW consensus + irreversible)
think-tank-dialectic → Hegelian resolution (how do we reconcile real tension?)
↓
ceo-agent → autonomous execution after decision
Chain: survey output → feed into think-tank → Decision Brief → (optional escalate to dialectic for irreversible LOW-consensus calls) → CEO executes.
| Role | voltagent subagent_type | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Architect | voltagent-qa-sec:architect-reviewer | Technical feasibility, coupling, performance, tech debt |
| Product Director | voltagent-biz:product-manager | Feature ROI, priority, scope, success metrics |
| UX Advocate | voltagent-biz:ux-researcher | User experience, interaction flow, edge cases |
| QA Devil | voltagent-qa-sec:qa-expert | Test coverage, regression risk, failure modes |
| Ops/SRE | voltagent-infra:sre-engineer | Deploy complexity, monitoring, rollback, resource usage |
| Customer Advocate | voltagent-biz:customer-success-manager | User needs, pain points, retention impact |
voltagent is optional — degrade gracefully (autopilot is standalone-capable). The
voltagent-*subagent_type values are preferred, not required. If novoltagent-*agents are installed (autopilot ships onlyreviewer/debugger/planner), dispatch each role viageneral-purposewith the inline role prompt (this panel MUST run with zero voltagent agents present).
Small decisions don't need 6 roles. Pick the 3 most relevant:
| Topic Type | Suggested Roles |
|---|---|
| Technical approach | Architect + QA + Ops |
| Feature scope | Product + UX + Customer |
| Performance vs features | Architect + Product + Ops |
| New user-facing feature | UX + QA + Customer |
Extract from user input:
If the topic is too vague, ask one clarifying round first.
Read codebase context relevant to the topic (architecture docs, domain skills, related source code). Compile into a shared context block for all roles. Each role needs sufficient domain knowledge to produce valuable perspectives.
Model routing: Read .claude/model-routing-config.md if it exists; otherwise use defaults from references/model-routing.md. Think-tank roles map to think-tank-role → default: model: "sonnet", mode: "plan".
Spawn all roles simultaneously (6 or 3), each agent gets:
Agent({
subagent_type: "<voltagent-type>",
model: "sonnet", // from model-routing config (think-tank-role)
mode: "plan", // analysis only — no implementation
prompt: "<role-prompt> + <domain-context> + <topic>",
run_in_background: true,
name: "tt-<role>"
})
Dispatch ALL roles simultaneously — do not wait for one to complete before dispatching the next.
After all roles report back, synthesize into a Decision Brief:
Use the fixed format (see references/brief-template.md), including:
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
| Agent timeout | Produce partial brief from available roles, mark missing ones |
| All roles agree | Normal — mark as "strong consensus", but verify no angle was missed |
| All roles oppose | Report to user, suggest not proceeding or redefining the topic |
| Topic too broad (multiple independent decisions) | Split into sub-topics, run one round per sub-topic |
| Skill | Relationship |
|---|---|
autopilot:survey | Survey finds external data, think-tank does internal debate. Can chain. |
autopilot:think-tank-dialectic | Escalation target for LOW consensus + irreversible decisions. Think-tank maps perspectives; dialectic resolves genuine stalemates via Hegelian synthesis. Use dialectic only after think-tank shows real tension, not as a default. |
autopilot:ceo-agent | CEO autonomously invokes think-tank for strategic decisions |
Parallel dispatcher (per .claude/dispatch-config.md, default: native Task tool) | think-tank fans roles out in parallel via the first available entry — superpowers:dispatching-parallel-agents if configured and installed, otherwise multiple Task tool calls in a single response |
npx claudepluginhub cookys/autopilot --plugin autopilotFacilitates multi-advisor council debates on architecture, technology, or product decisions using domain archetype subagents. Use for trade-off analysis, PRD stress-testing, or resolving dilemmas with multiple viable options.
Facilitates structured multi-role debates to explore trade-offs and derive optimal solutions. Useful for architecture decisions, technology selection, and balancing competing priorities.
Spawns multiple expert roles to debate design/architecture trade-offs and produce integrated, balanced conclusions.