---
id: gh-paseo-committee
name: "paseo-committee"
url: https://skills.yangsir.net/skill/gh-paseo-committee
author: getpaseo
domain: ai-agent-orchestration-collaboration
tags: ["multi-agent", "root-cause-analysis", "planning", "collaboration", "problem-solving"]
install_count: 4700
rating: 4.40 (120 reviews)
github: https://github.com/getpaseo/paseo/tree/main/skills/paseo-committee
---

# paseo-committee

> 此技能通过组建由两个高推理能力智能体组成的委员会，专门用于进行根本原因分析并制定详细计划。当用户在复杂问题中陷入困境、循环往复、视野受限或面临艰难的规划挑战时，该 Skill 能提供全新的视角和解决方案，有效打破僵局，确保问题得到彻底解决。

**Stats**: 4,700 installs · 4.4/5 (120 reviews)

## Before / After 对比

### 复杂问题解决效率

**Before**:

用户在复杂问题中陷入困境，难以找到根本原因，规划过程反复受阻，团队成员可能陷入思维定势，导致效率低下和决策失误。

**After**:

此技能通过引入两个高推理智能体进行独立分析和协作，能快速识别根本原因，提供多角度解决方案，显著提升决策质量和问题解决效率。

| Metric | Before | After | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 决策点数 | 30个 | 5个 | -83% |
| 根本原因识别时间 | 240分钟 | 60分钟 | -75% |
| 方案采纳率 | 50% | 90% | +80% |

## Readme

# Committee Skill

Two agents from contrasting providers, fresh context, planning a solution in parallel. They stay alive for review after implementation.

The purpose is to step back, not double down. The committee may propose a completely different approach.

**User's additional context:** $ARGUMENTS

## Prerequisites

Read the **paseo** skill. Before choosing committee members, read `~/.paseo/orchestration-preferences.json` unless the user explicitly named providers in this request. Do not create committee agents until you have read it.

Contrast is the point of a committee, so pick across providers deliberately using the configured preferences rather than hardcoded defaults.

## Composition

Two members with different reasoning styles, selected from orchestration preferences:

- one planning/research-strength provider
- one contrasting high-reasoning provider

Override only when the user explicitly asks for different members.

## Hard rules

- **No edits.** Every prompt to a committee member ends with the no-edits suffix:

  ```
  This is analysis only. Do NOT edit, create, or delete any files. Do NOT write code.
  ```

- **Trust the wait.** Do not poll, send hurry-ups, or interrupt. GPT-5.4 can reason 15–30 minutes; Opus does extended thinking. Long waits mean it found something worth thinking about.
- **You are the middleman.** Drive plan → implement → review without yielding to the user, except for divergences that need their call.

## Phase 1: Plan

Write a problem-level prompt:

- High-level goal and acceptance criteria
- Constraints
- Symptoms (if a bug)
- What you tried and why it failed
- Explicit: "do root cause analysis"
- Explicit: "state assumptions, ask why three levels deep, check whether you're patching a symptom or removing the problem"

Create both agents in parallel via Paseo with `[Committee] <task>` titles and the same prompt. Wait for both — not just whichever finishes first.

Read both responses. Challenge them — do not accept at face value:

- "Why does <underlying thing> happen? Symptom or cause?"
- Verify any assumption the plan makes about the code.
- "What did you considered and reject?"

Send follow-ups until the plan addresses root cause.

Synthesize:

- Convergence → unified plan.
- Significant divergence → involve the user.

Confirm the merged plan with both members. Multi-turn until consensus.

## Phase 2: Implement

Default: implement yourself. If the user said **"delegate"**, launch one impl agent and pass the merged plan.

The committee stays clean — not involved in implementation.

## Phase 3: Review

Send the diff to the committee:

> Implementation is done. Review changes against the plan. Flag drift or missing pieces. <no-edits suffix>

Apply feedback yourself, or send to the impl agent. Repeat 2 → 3 until consensus.

After ~10 iterations without convergence, start a fresh committee with the full history of what was tried — the current committee's context may have drifted too far.


---
*Source: https://skills.yangsir.net/skill/gh-paseo-committee*
*Markdown mirror: https://skills.yangsir.net/api/skill/gh-paseo-committee/markdown*