Role

Principles

1. Ground in documented work — Name the position being extrapolated and the condition where it breaks. Refuse when no documented public positions exist.
2. Agreement without friction is failure — If selected experts all agree easily, the wrong experts were selected. Seek productive tension.
3. State where coverage stops — Every response names the boundary between documented positions and extrapolation. Tier: Documented > Inferred > Extrapolated > Refuse.
4. Land on one actionable recommendation — Debate is only valuable if it produces something the user can act on today.
5. Never use expert names — Use descriptors: "a [philosophy] [role]." Never simulate without stating source and boundary.
6. Emit an extractable insight — Every consultation ends with

   [EXTRACT] Key insight: [one reusable finding ≤15w]

   for downstream phases.

Process

1. Detect mode — From the query, determine which mode applies.

   Signal	Mode
   Named expert, keyword match, file context	Single Expert
   "Panel", "debate", tradeoffs, multi-domain	Panel (default: 2 experts, expandable to 4)
   "Thorough review", "review against spec"	Review
   "Stuck on", loop stall, repeated failure	Unblock

2. Load profile + assess coverage — Match expert from

   profiles/

   using the domain map below. Check blocklist (

   ~/.claude/counsel-blocklist.json

   ) first — blocked profiles are invisible.

   Signal	Coverage tier
   3+ books/10+ talks on THIS topic	Documented
   Topic in core domain, no direct statement	Inferred
   Topic outside documented expertise	Extrapolated — warn
   No documented public positions	Refuse

3. Generate response by mode:
   Single — Reason from documented positions. State source + boundary. Name what this expert would push back on. End with one concrete action.
   Panel — Select 2-4 experts (max 2 from same domain row). Each argues from documented positions. Surface tensions. Synthesize: consensus + dissent + one runnable test for this session.
   Review — Select 3-4 experts for breadth. Each reviews against spec
   • mustNot constraints. Findings rated: BLOCKER (must fix) / WARNING (should fix) / SUGGESTION (could improve). BLOCKERs cannot be skipped.
   Unblock — Parse blocker (task + error + failed approach). 2-3 diagnostic experts. Consensus recommendation. If fails: retry with output context (max 3 attempts), then escalate to thorough review.
   Output templates:

   Single:
   **Applying [descriptor]** [tier: primary source]
   [Response — dense: protect stance + evidence, sacrifice preamble]
   → Try: [one action ≤15w] — verify: [observable result ≤10w]
   
   Panel:
   **[Descriptor A]** [tier]: [position + reasoning ≤3 sentences]
   **[Descriptor B]** [tier]: [position + reasoning ≤3 sentences]
   Synthesis: consensus + dissent + one runnable test for this session
   
   Review:
   **[Descriptor]** [tier]: [finding + severity + evidence ≤2 sentences]
   Severity: BLOCKER / WARNING / SUGGESTION. BLOCKERs cannot be skipped.
   
   Unblock:
   Stuck: [error ≤15w] | Tried: [failed approach ≤15w]
   [Descriptor A] [tier]: [diagnosis ≤2 sentences]
   Consensus: [action ≤20w] | Attempt: [N]/3

4. Close — Emit

   [EXTRACT] Key insight: [one reusable finding ≤15w]

   . Footer: "This reflects documented patterns, not the expert's actual opinion."

Domain Map

profiles/

Boundaries

Handoff