# Plan: Council of 10 + Researcher + Scribe + Moderator ## Context `/var/mnt/data/projects/council/` is empty. The user wants a Claude Code project — used from the CLI **and** opened as a single Obsidian vault rooted at the repo — that runs a structured multi-agent deliberation on problems posed by the user. Roles: - **Moderator** (the main Claude Code session) interviews the user for context, orchestrates phases, narrates visibly, and brokers tie-breaks. Only the Moderator talks to the user. - **Researcher** (Naima Quéré, Sonnet) is the **only** sub-agent with web access. She runs a pre-session research pass off the brief, and is re-invoked on demand when members flag gaps during debate. Writes per-topic research notes into the session directory as a shared evidence base. - **10 Voting Members** deliberate in three phases (initial answer → debate/revise → vote). Members **cannot** browse the web; they rely on the shared research package. - **Scribe** (Ansel Voss, Haiku) transcribes the proceedings as phases complete, writes the canonical session files. - **The User** answers the Phase 0 interview, answers any Phase 3 clarification questions raised by members, and breaks vote ties when they occur. Sessions are the core artefact — one directory per session at the repo root. ### Decisions locked in during planning | Decision | Choice | |---|---| | Command trigger | `/council ` | | Voting cast | 10 voting members, "wild eclectic mix" | | Non-voting cast | Researcher (Sonnet) + Scribe (Haiku) | | Voting | **Transparent** — answers attributed by name; self-votes allowed; ties → **user breaks the tie** | | Models | Sonnet 4.6 for initial answers / vote / memory updates / Researcher; Opus 4.7 for debate/revise; Haiku 4.5 for Scribe | | Research access | Only Researcher and Moderator have `WebSearch`/`WebFetch`. Members request research via Phase-3 flags. | | Pre-session research | Moderator writes the brief after interview; Researcher immediately runs a pre-session research pass off the brief; members open Phase 2 with a ready-made research package. | | Clarification flag | `User clarification needed` can be raised by **any** agent in **any** phase (Researcher in Phase 1, members in Phases 2 / 3 / 4). Moderator batches, asks the user via `AskUserQuestion`, and appends answers to `brief.md`. Phase-specific handling in the orchestration section. | | Research-gap flag | `Research gap` can be raised by Researcher (before Phase 1) or members (Phase 3). Moderator consolidates and re-invokes the Researcher. Round-2 research files carry `round: 2`. | | Follow-up loop bound | At most **one** bounded extra revision round in Phase 3 (triggered by Phase-2 or Phase-3 flags). Further flags in later rounds are logged to `outcome.md` as open questions, not acted on. | | Storage | Repo root is the Obsidian vault; sessions at `sessions//` | | Session slug | `YYYY-MM-DD_`; `-2`, `-3`, … appended on same-day collisions | | Obsidian version | Assume ≥1.9 (Bases) | | User visibility | User sees only Moderator narration. No raw tool output, no inter-agent packets. | ## The Cast ### 10 Voting Members (wild eclectic mix) | # | Name | Prior job(s) | Personality | Lens | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | **Elif Tavşan** | Retired stage magician & cold-reading coach | Playful, watchful, fond of misdirection | Spots sleight-of-hand in arguments; suspicious of "obvious" framings | | 2 | **Dr. Wren Okafor** | Deep-sea marine biologist → systems ecologist | Calm, patient, thinks in decades | Feedback loops, unintended consequences, long-time-horizon reasoning | | 3 | **Magnus Holt** | Bankruptcy lawyer → insolvency law lecturer | Dry, adversarial, pessimism as craft | Failure modes — "what happens when this breaks?" | | 4 | **Sister Beatrix Vale** | Benedictine nun → hospice counselor | Gentle, unflappable, never moralizes | Meaning, grief, what actually matters | | 5 | **Nikolai "Niko" Prochazka** | Soviet cosmonaut trainer → wilderness survival instructor | Blunt, impatient with abstractions | Operational execution, checklists, ruthless prioritization | | 6 | **Dr. Ingrid Vaasa** | Theoretical physicist (QFT) → independent researcher | Abstracts aggressively, reaches for the simplest model | First-principles reasoning, toy models, symmetries/invariants | | 7 | **Kai "Breaker" Lindholm** | Pro skateboarder → skatepark architect | Kinetic, improvisational, body-first thinker | Embodied intuition, iteration, "does it feel right?" | | 8 | **Cassian Vire** | Investigative journalist → speculative-fiction novelist (doorstopper systems-SF; Stephenson × Hamilton flavor) | Restless, tangent-prone, maximalist; infodumps if un-moderated | Systems-level extrapolation across long horizons; civilizational-scale consequence-chaining | | 9 | **Marcelo "Marco" Tintori** | Trained painter (Bologna) → 20 years as a corrections officer → runs a prison art program | Dry, darkly funny, slightly melancholy; allergic to piety | Institutional reality vs. theory; dignity of the specific; absurdity as a signal of misalignment | | 10 | **Mari Koskela** | Marine engineer on cargo ships (12 years) → PhD anthropology of maritime labor → independent ethnographer | Patient, observant, dry humor; asks "what do they actually do?" before "what does the spec say?" | How humans actually inhabit the systems they build; practice vs. procedure; ritual, labor, power | Slugs: `tavsan`, `okafor`, `holt`, `vale`, `prochazka`, `vaasa`, `lindholm`, `vire`, `tintori`, `koskela`. ### Non-voting: Researcher **Naima Quéré** — ex-investigative journalist → national-archive research librarian → independent OSINT analyst. Slug: `researcher`. Model: Sonnet. - Only sub-agent with `WebSearch` / `WebFetch`. - Methodical, skeptical-but-fair; cites sources with URL + access date; flags conflicting evidence and uncertainty explicitly. - Writes one file per topic into `sessions//research/`. - Runs twice at most per session: Phase 1 (pre-research off the brief), and optionally Phase 3b (follow-up on research gaps flagged by members). - **May flag `User clarification needed` at any point during Phase 1** — before starting (if the brief is too vague to research usefully), or mid-research (if ambiguity surfaces once she starts digging). Either way, she returns early with 1-3 concrete questions; Moderator asks the user via `AskUserQuestion`, appends answers to `brief.md`, then re-invokes her. - Does not opine on the council's question. ### Non-voting: Scribe **Ansel Voss** — former court stenographer and municipal archivist. Slug: `scribe`. Model: Haiku 4.5. - Writes canonical session files (`initial-answers.md`, `revised-answers.md`, `votes.md`, `outcome.md`) as phases complete. - Neutral — verbatim where it matters, summarizing where it helps. Never editorializes. Keeps Obsidian frontmatter and wikilinks tidy. ### Moderator **The main Claude Code session** (not a sub-agent). Responsibilities: 1. **Phase 0**: 2-4 context questions to the user via `AskUserQuestion`. Writes `sessions//brief.md`. 2. **Phase 1**: invokes Researcher with the brief to produce the pre-session research package. 3. Narrates between phases (≤ ~10 lines per update). 4. **Phase 3**: collects `Research gap` and `User clarification needed` flags from members; runs Researcher and/or `AskUserQuestion` as needed; triggers one bounded second revision round if either fired. 5. **Phase 5**: tallies votes; on tie, presents tied answers to the user via `AskUserQuestion` (full answer as option preview). 6. Invokes Scribe and the memory-update batch. 7. Never prints raw tool-call output — always distils. ## Architecture ### Directory layout ``` council/ # ← repo root = Obsidian vault ├── CLAUDE.md # Claude Code guidance ├── README.md # Vault-facing overview ├── .claude/ │ ├── agents/ │ │ ├── council-tavsan.md # 10 voting members (model: sonnet) │ │ ├── council-okafor.md │ │ ├── council-holt.md │ │ ├── council-vale.md │ │ ├── council-prochazka.md │ │ ├── council-vaasa.md │ │ ├── council-lindholm.md │ │ ├── council-vire.md │ │ ├── council-tintori.md │ │ ├── council-koskela.md │ │ ├── council-researcher.md # Naima Quéré (sonnet, web tools) │ │ └── council-scribe.md # Ansel Voss (haiku) │ └── commands/ │ └── council.md # /council orchestration ├── council-members.base # Obsidian Base: roster ├── council-sessions.base # Obsidian Base: session index ├── docs/ # meta-docs about this project (not live data) │ └── structure/ │ └── initial-plan.md # archived copy of this plan (step 1 of implementation) ├── members/ │ ├── tavsan/ │ │ ├── persona.md # character sheet + frontmatter │ │ ├── journal.md # append-only session-log entries │ │ ├── on-the-user.md # accumulated observations about the user │ │ └── revisit.md # open questions/topics to come back to │ ├── okafor/ │ ├── holt/ │ ├── vale/ │ ├── prochazka/ │ ├── vaasa/ │ ├── lindholm/ │ ├── vire/ │ ├── tintori/ │ ├── koskela/ │ ├── researcher/ │ │ └── persona.md # persona only — no journal │ └── scribe/ │ └── persona.md # persona only — no journal └── sessions/ # ← the core of the repo └── 2026-04-19_self-host-email/ # one dir per /council run ├── brief.md # moderator writes (Phase 0) ├── research/ # researcher writes (Phase 1 + optional 3b) │ ├── fastmail-reliability.md │ └── self-hosting-risks.md ├── initial-answers.md # scribe: Phase 2 verbatim, attributed ├── revised-answers.md # scribe: Phase 3 critiques + revised (round 1 + optional round 2) ├── votes.md # scribe: Phase 4 votes + tally └── outcome.md # scribe: canonical session file (Obsidian Base target) ``` `.claude/` can be hidden in Obsidian's file-explorer settings; it doesn't break anything if visible. Wikilinks are folder-qualified (e.g. `[[members/vaasa/persona|Dr. Ingrid Vaasa]]`, `[[sessions/2026-04-19_self-host-email/outcome|Self-host email?]]`). ### Per-member memory layout Each voting member owns `members//`. Every file in that directory is read at the start of every invocation. **`persona.md`** — seed character sheet with frontmatter: ```markdown --- type: council-member slug: tavsan name: "Elif Tavşan" prior_job: "Retired stage magician & cold-reading coach" lens: "Pattern recognition, misdirection, skepticism of the obvious" voting: true model: sonnet --- # Elif Tavşan **Personality:** … **Voice:** … **Things she notices first:** … ``` **`journal.md`** — append-only; one entry per `/council` run (newest on top), with wikilinks to the session outcome and to members referenced. ```markdown --- type: council-journal slug: tavsan --- # Journal — Elif Tavşan ## 2026-04-19 — [[sessions/2026-04-19_self-host-email/outcome|Should I self-host my email?]] - **Stance:** Let the vendor carry the risk; switch only when it bites. - **Revised answer gist:** … - **My vote:** [[members/vaasa/persona|Vaasa]] — simplest model; the rest was theatre. - **Outcome:** Vaasa won 4-3-2-1. - **Lesson:** I lean toward misdirection-spotting; useful for grand plans, noise on small ones. ``` **`on-the-user.md`** — slow-growing picture of the user; update only when something non-obvious comes up. **`revisit.md`** — checklist of questions/topics to come back to. Researcher and Scribe have only `persona.md` — they write session files, not journals. ### Session directory layout **`sessions//brief.md`** — Moderator writes after Phase 0 interview: ```markdown --- type: council-brief date: 2026-04-19 slug: 2026-04-19_self-host-email problem: "Should I self-host my email or use Fastmail?" --- # Brief — Should I self-host my email? ## Question {verbatim user prompt} ## Clarifications from the Phase-0 interview - Time pressure: none — exploring. - Constraints: single user, €20/mo soft budget, comfortable with Linux admin. - Decision criteria: reliability > cost > sovereignty. ## Research threads to investigate (for the Researcher) - Fastmail reliability + recent incidents - Self-hosted-mail deliverability today (SPF/DKIM/DMARC, IP reputation) - Migration cost and lock-in - … ## What a good answer looks like A recommendation with the conditions under which the recommendation flips. ## Additions from Phase-1 clarifications ## Additions from Phase-2 clarifications ## Additions from Phase-3 clarifications ``` **`sessions//research/.md`** — Researcher writes, one per topic: ```markdown --- type: council-research session: 2026-04-19_self-host-email topic: "Fastmail reliability" round: 1 --- # Fastmail reliability ## Summary One or two paragraphs — what the evidence says, in Naima's analytic voice. ## Evidence - [status.fastmail.com — incidents 2024–2026](https://status.fastmail.com/history) (accessed 2026-04-19) - … ## Uncertainty / conflicting sources - … ``` Round-2 research files (from Phase 3b follow-ups) set `round: 2`. **`initial-answers.md`, `revised-answers.md`, `votes.md`** — Scribe writes after each phase. `revised-answers.md` has sections for Round 1 and (if any) Round 2. `votes.md` includes each member's vote + rationale and the tally. **`outcome.md`** — canonical session file (picked up by the Obsidian Base): ```markdown --- type: council-session date: 2026-04-19 slug: 2026-04-19_self-host-email problem: "Should I self-host my email or use Fastmail?" participants: [tavsan, okafor, holt, vale, prochazka, vaasa, lindholm, vire, tintori, koskela] winner: vaasa tied: false tie_broken_by_user: false votes: {vaasa: 4, okafor: 3, vale: 2, tintori: 1} had_research_gap_round: false had_phase1_clarification: false had_phase2_clarification: false had_phase3_clarification: false open_questions_at_vote: [] tags: [email, self-hosting, infra] --- # Outcome — Should I self-host my email? See [[brief]], [[initial-answers]], [[revised-answers]], [[votes]]. ## Winner — [[members/vaasa/persona|Dr. Ingrid Vaasa]] (4 votes) {verbatim winning revised answer} ## Vote tally {table from votes.md} ``` ### Obsidian Bases **`council-sessions.base`**: ```yaml filters: and: - note.type == "council-session" properties: note.date: {displayName: Date} note.problem: {displayName: Question} note.winner: {displayName: Winner} note.tied: {displayName: Tied} note.tie_broken_by_user: {displayName: User tiebreak?} note.had_research_gap_round: {displayName: Extra research?} note.had_phase1_clarification: {displayName: Phase-1 clarif?} note.had_phase2_clarification: {displayName: Phase-2 clarif?} note.had_phase3_clarification: {displayName: Phase-3 clarif?} note.tags: {displayName: Tags} views: - type: table name: All sessions order: [file.name, note.date, note.problem, note.winner, note.tied, note.tags] sort: - property: note.date direction: DESC ``` **`council-members.base`**: ```yaml filters: and: - note.type == "council-member" properties: note.name: {displayName: Name} note.prior_job: {displayName: Prior job} note.lens: {displayName: Lens} note.voting: {displayName: Votes?} views: - type: table name: The Council order: [note.name, note.prior_job, note.lens, note.voting] ``` ## Orchestration — `/council ` Load-bearing file: `.claude/commands/council.md`. Every phase produces an internal data flow (sub-agent calls) **and** visible user output (Moderator narration). ### Phase 0 — Context interview (Moderator ↔ User) 1. Moderator reads `$ARGUMENTS`, proposes a session slug (`YYYY-MM-DD_`), creates `sessions//`. 2. Generates 2-4 targeted clarifying questions via `AskUserQuestion`: constraints, time pressure, who's affected, decision criteria, what a good answer looks like. 3. Writes `sessions//brief.md` — problem, user's answers, constraints, a first-pass list of research threads. **User sees:** the clarifying questions, then: "Brief written to `sessions/.../brief.md`. Sending to the Researcher for a pre-session pass." ### Phase 1 — Pre-session research (1 × Sonnet Researcher; may trigger user-clarification sub-step) Moderator invokes `council-researcher` with the brief. The Researcher is told: "You may return a `## User clarification needed` section at **any point during your work** — before starting (if the brief is too vague to research) or mid-research (if ambiguity surfaces as you dig). 1-3 concrete questions only the user can answer. If you have no clarifications, proceed to research and produce topic files." **If Researcher flags clarifications:** - Moderator consolidates → `AskUserQuestion` (up to 4 questions) → appends answers to `brief.md` under `## Additions from Phase-1 clarifications` → re-invokes Researcher once (she now has the updated brief). Max one clarification round at this phase. **If Researcher proceeds:** - Identifies 5-10 concrete topics from the brief's "Research threads" section (expanding where she thinks useful). - Runs web searches; synthesizes. - Writes one `sessions//research/.md` per topic (frontmatter `round: 1`). - Returns a short table of contents. **User sees:** either the clarification question block (if Researcher flagged), then a confirmation, then: list of topics researched, file count, "Research package ready in `sessions/.../research/`. Handing to the Council." ### Phase 2 — Initial Answer (10 × Sonnet, parallel; members may flag clarifications) 10 `Agent` calls in parallel. Each member reads: the brief, all files in `sessions//research/`, its own `members//` files. Returns: - `## Initial answer` (self-contained) - `## Confidence (1-5)` - Optional `## User clarification needed` — 1-2 concrete questions only the user can answer that would change the answer. Still produce the initial answer as the member's best current shot. Members **must** cite research-file filenames when a claim leans on them. **If any member raises clarifications:** Moderator consolidates + dedupes → `AskUserQuestion` (up to 4 questions) → appends answers to `brief.md` under `## Additions from Phase-2 clarifications`. The updated brief flows into Phase 3; Phase 2 is **not** re-run (cost avoidance — Phase 3 is where revision happens anyway). After collection, Moderator invokes Scribe to write `sessions//initial-answers.md` (verbatim, attributed, including any clarification flags raised). **User sees:** > **Moderator:** 10 initial answers in. One-line summaries: > - **Tavşan:** <≤15 words> > - **Okafor:** <≤15 words> > - … > > [if any clarifications were raised:] Clarifications requested from you — see next question block. > (Moderator then hits `AskUserQuestion`.) > > Written to `initial-answers.md`. Moving to debate + revise on Opus. ### Phase 3 — Debate + Revise (10 × Opus, parallel, with optional bounded follow-up) Moderator assembles the debate packet: the 10 attributed initial answers. Dispatches 10 `Agent` calls with `model: "opus"`, each given: - problem + brief + research files + debate packet + own memory - phase directive: > Critique the other 9 (one paragraph each). Produce a `Revised answer` (self-contained). `What changed and why` (≤3 bullets). > > If information is missing and would change your answer, include **one or both**: > - `## Research gap` — one or two specific, searchable questions. Be concrete. > - `## User clarification needed` — one or two questions only the user can answer. > > Either way, still produce your `Revised answer` as your best current shot. **Moderator handling after Phase 3a returns:** - **If any member raised `Research gap`:** Moderator consolidates gaps → dedupes → invokes Researcher for a second run, writing new files to `research/` with `round: 2`. - **If any member raised `User clarification needed`:** Moderator consolidates the questions → uses `AskUserQuestion` with up to 4 questions → appends the user's answers to `brief.md` under `## Additions from Phase-3 clarifications`. - **If either fired**, Moderator runs one **bounded second revision round** (10 × Opus): members see their first-round revised answer + the new information and produce a final revised answer. Hard cap at one follow-up loop; further flags in round 2 are noted but not acted on. Scribe writes `revised-answers.md` (with Round 1 and, if present, Round 2 sections). Outcome flags `had_research_gap_round` / `had_user_clarification_round` in `outcome.md` frontmatter reflect whether these fired. **User sees:** > **Moderator:** Revisions in. Notable shifts: > - **Tavşan:** held ground / softened on X / pivoted to Y > - … > > Research gaps flagged by [members]: running round-2 research on [topics]. > (or: "No research gaps or clarifications requested.") > > Clarifications requested from you — see next question block. > (Moderator then hits `AskUserQuestion` with the consolidated clarification questions.) > > Moving to vote on Sonnet. ### Phase 4 — Vote (10 × Sonnet, parallel, transparent; late clarifications noted but not acted on) Moderator assembles the ballot: the 10 final revised answers, **attributed by name** (no anonymization — per user: "the agents will be reading each other's arguments and will already have an idea who is saying what; anonymity mostly hides things from me"). Dispatches 10 `Agent` calls, each given: - problem + brief + ballot (attributed) + own memory - "Reply with `## Vote: ` on its own line (e.g. `## Vote: vaasa`), then `## Rationale` (one sentence). Self-votes are allowed. You may add an optional `## User clarification needed` section if something still bothers you — it will be surfaced to the user in the outcome as an open question, but will not delay the vote." Voter-raised clarifications at this point are **informational** — Moderator surfaces them in `outcome.md` under `## Open questions raised at vote` and does not re-run earlier phases. (Enforces the one-bounded-loop rule.) Scribe writes `votes.md` with each member's vote + rationale, any clarification flags, and the tally. ### Phase 5 — Tally, tie-break, present, archive 1. **Moderator tallies.** 2. **No tie:** prints voting table + full winning answer; invokes Scribe to write `outcome.md`. 3. **Tie:** Moderator calls `AskUserQuestion` — one option per tied answer. `description` = 1-paragraph scribe-style summary + key differentiator. `preview` = verbatim full answer. User picks → winner. `outcome.md` records `tied: true`, `tie_broken_by_user: true`. 4. **Memory update batch**: 10 parallel Sonnet `Agent` calls, each told the final outcome + their own vote + the winner; each appends to `members//journal.md` (and updates `on-the-user.md`/`revisit.md` if warranted). Returns one-line confirmations. **Final user output:** ``` | Voter | Voted for (snippet) | |---|---| | Elif Tavşan | Dr. Ingrid Vaasa — "Strip to the minimal model…" | | Dr. Wren Okafor | Dr. Wren Okafor (self) — "Treat this as a coupled…" | | Magnus Holt | Dr. Ingrid Vaasa — "Least hidden state, least failure" | | Sister Vale | Dr. Wren Okafor — "The decision underneath the decision" | | Niko Prochazka | Dr. Ingrid Vaasa — "Cleanest checklist" | | Dr. Vaasa | Dr. Ingrid Vaasa (self) — "Toy model is the argument" | | Kai Lindholm | Marcelo Tintori — "Feels human" | | Cassian Vire | Dr. Wren Okafor — "Scales across a century" | | Marcelo Tintori | Sister Vale — "Cuts the theatre" | | Mari Koskela | Dr. Ingrid Vaasa — "Matches observed practice" | **Result:** Dr. Ingrid Vaasa wins with 4 votes. --- ## Winning answer — Dr. Ingrid Vaasa --- Session logged → `sessions/2026-04-19_self-host-email/` ``` ### Moderator output discipline - Each between-phase update ≤ ~10 lines. - Never dumps raw sub-agent output or tool-call content. - If the user asks "what did X say?" mid-flow or after, Moderator can print that specific member's full answer on request. - On sub-agent errors/timeouts, surfaces which members failed and whether to retry or proceed with fewer. ## Tool permissions per agent Enforced via each sub-agent's `tools:` frontmatter; reiterated in each system prompt. | Agent | Read | Write/Edit | Grep/Glob | WebSearch / WebFetch | |---|---|---|---|---| | Voting members (×10) | ✓ | only in own `members//` | ✓ | ✗ | | Researcher (Naima Quéré) | ✓ | only in `sessions//research/` | ✓ | ✓ | | Scribe (Ansel Voss) | ✓ | in `sessions//` except `research/` | ✓ | ✗ | | Moderator (main session) | ✓ | anywhere | ✓ | ✓ | Path-level write scoping is a convention reinforced in each system prompt; Claude Code sub-agents share the filesystem, so the social contract matters. ## CLAUDE.md content (sketch) ```markdown # CLAUDE.md This file provides guidance to Claude Code (claude.ai/code) when working with code in this repository. ## What this repo is A "Council of 10" deliberation system, with a dedicated Researcher and a Scribe, orchestrated by the main Claude Code session as Moderator. Sessions are the core artefact — one directory per session at `sessions//`. The repo root is an Obsidian vault. ## Running a council session `/council ` — the only entry point. Orchestration in `.claude/commands/council.md`. Phases: - **0. Context interview** — Moderator ↔ user via `AskUserQuestion`. Moderator writes `sessions//brief.md`. - **1. Pre-session research** — Researcher (Naima Quéré, Sonnet, only web-enabled sub-agent) writes `sessions//research/.md` files off the brief. May flag `User clarification needed` before researching if the brief is too vague. - **2. Initial answers** — 10 members, parallel, Sonnet — with brief + research package in hand. Members may flag `User clarification needed`; answers append to `brief.md` and flow into Phase 3 (Phase 2 is not re-run). - **3. Debate + Revise** — 10 members, parallel, Opus. Members may flag `Research gap` (→ Researcher round 2) or `User clarification needed` (→ Moderator asks user). If either fires, one bounded second revision round happens. - **4. Vote** — 10 members, parallel, Sonnet. Ballot is **transparent** (attributed by name). Self-votes allowed. Any last clarification flags are surfaced in `outcome.md` as open questions without re-running earlier phases. - **5. Tally + Tie-break + Archive** — Moderator tallies. On tie: `AskUserQuestion` with tied full answers as option previews. Scribe writes `outcome.md`. Final Sonnet batch updates each member's `journal.md`. ## Web access rule Only the Researcher and the Moderator can use `WebSearch`/`WebFetch`. Council members cannot. Members who need more info flag it in Phase 3 via `## Research gap`. ## User clarification is available in every phase Any agent may flag `## User clarification needed` in any phase (Researcher in Phase 1, members in Phases 2–4). The Moderator batches the questions, asks the user via `AskUserQuestion`, and appends the answers to `brief.md`. Handling depends on the phase: Phase 1 → re-run Researcher once; Phase 2 → updated brief flows into Phase 3; Phase 3 → one bounded follow-up revision round; Phase 4 → surfaced in `outcome.md` only, no re-run. ## Moderator responsibilities The main Claude Code session is the Moderator — the user's only window into the proceedings: 1. Narrates between phases (≤ ~10 lines per update). 2. Runs the Phase-0 interview and the Phase-3 user-clarification sub-interviews. 3. Consolidates research-gap flags and re-invokes the Researcher when warranted. 4. On vote ties, presents tied full answers via `AskUserQuestion`. 5. Never prints raw tool output. ## Directory map - `.claude/agents/council-*.md` — 10 voting members + `council-researcher.md` + `council-scribe.md` - `.claude/commands/council.md` — `/council` orchestration - `members//` — per-member memory (`persona.md`, `journal.md`, `on-the-user.md`, `revisit.md`) - `sessions//` — one directory per session (`brief.md`, `research/`, `initial-answers.md`, `revised-answers.md`, `votes.md`, `outcome.md`) - `council-sessions.base`, `council-members.base` — Obsidian Bases at repo root ## Memory protocol Each voting member reads every file in its `members//` directory at the start of every invocation. Every `/council` run produces: - One `journal.md` entry per voting member (mandatory, via the Phase-5 memory batch). - Updates to `on-the-user.md` and `revisit.md` only when non-obvious. - One full session directory at `sessions//`. Researcher and Scribe have persona files only; no journals. ## Obsidian conventions Every markdown file has YAML frontmatter with a `type` property (`council-member`, `council-journal`, `council-brief`, `council-research`, `council-session`). Wikilinks are folder-qualified. Two `.base` files provide table views. ## Modifying the council - Swap a voting member: edit `.claude/agents/council-.md` and `members//persona.md` (mirror both). - Add a voting member: create the agent def, seed `members//`, update the roster (and the "10 members" count wording) in `.claude/commands/council.md`. - Researcher and Scribe are singletons — edit their files directly. ``` ## Verification After implementation, verify end-to-end: 1. Run `/council "Should I self-host my email or use Fastmail?"` — expect: - Phase 0 `AskUserQuestion` (2-4 questions); `sessions/2026-04-19_self-host-email/brief.md` appears. - `sessions/.../research/*.md` files appear from the Researcher's pre-session pass. - 10 distinct initial answers cited against research files. - `revised-answers.md` with Round-1 revisions; if any member flagged a `Research gap` / `User clarification needed`, verify Round 2 + updated brief. - Transparent vote: ballot shows authors; votes + rationale logged. - `outcome.md` with complete frontmatter, wikilinks, and verbatim winning answer. - Each of the 10 `members//journal.md` gains one new entry referencing the session. 2. `council-sessions.base` in Obsidian shows the new session (sorted by date DESC). 3. `council-members.base` shows all 10 voting members + Researcher + Scribe, with `voting: false` for the latter two. 4. Run a second, unrelated question (`/council "How do I tell my sister I'm not coming to her wedding?"`) — personas stay in character; memories from run 1 don't inappropriately bleed in; fresh session directory. 5. Force a close vote (or wait until one happens). On tie: Moderator hits `AskUserQuestion` with tied full answers as option previews; `outcome.md` records `tie_broken_by_user: true`. 6. Run a question that the Researcher clearly can't fully answer upfront; expect at least one member to raise a `Research gap`, Researcher to produce a round-2 file, and Round-2 revised answers to appear. 7. Verify no voting member has `WebSearch`/`WebFetch` in its `tools:` frontmatter; only Researcher does. 8. Confirm Moderator narration stays concise; no raw sub-agent output leaks into user-facing text. ## Critical files to create (in order) 1. **`docs/structure/initial-plan.md`** — copy of this plan archived into the repo, so it lives alongside what it describes. Written first thing when implementation starts. 2. `CLAUDE.md`, `README.md` 3. `.claude/agents/council-tavsan.md` … `council-koskela.md` (10 voting members) 4. `.claude/agents/council-researcher.md` (Naima Quéré) 5. `.claude/agents/council-scribe.md` (Ansel Voss) 6. `members//persona.md` × 12 (10 voting + researcher + scribe) — with frontmatter 7. `members//{journal.md, on-the-user.md, revisit.md}` × 10 voting members — empty-with-header 8. `council-sessions.base`, `council-members.base` 9. `.claude/commands/council.md` — orchestration (save for last; depends on everything above)