nous-hermeshub /cs:boardroom — Multi-Role Boardroom Deliberation
Command: /cs:boardroom <brief-path>
Runs the board-meeting skill protocol across the C-suite for a single strategy brief. This is the heart of the plugin — the multi-role deliberation that gstack's review chain only approximates.
Pipeline Position
/cs:office-hours → /cs:brief → /cs:boardroom → /cs:decide → /cs:execute → /cs:post-mortem
↑ you are here
The 6 Phases (from board-meeting skill)
Phase 1 — Briefing
- Chief of Staff distributes the brief to all advisors marked in Affected Roles.
- Each advisor reads company-context.md + the brief.
- No discussion yet.
Phase 2 — Independent Thinking (ISOLATION)
- Critical: each advisor produces their position independently, without seeing others' positions.
- This prevents groupthink and surfaces dissent.
- Each writes: their voice's opening, recommendation, top 3 concerns, top 3 supports.
Phase 3 — Cross-Examination
- Positions revealed simultaneously.
- Each advisor critiques the others' positions on the dimensions they own:
- cs-cfo-advisor critiques the math
- cs-ciso-advisor critiques the risk
- cs-cpo-advisor critiques the JTBD
- cs-cmo-advisor critiques the positioning
- cs-cro-advisor critiques the revenue math
- etc.
Phase 4 — Devil's Advocate Pass
executive-mentor/devils-advocateagent runs/em:challengeon the leading option.- Surfaces three concerns with severity ratings.
Phase 5 — Synthesis
- Chief of Staff synthesizes: which option commands majority, what are unresolved dissents.
- Produces the board memo with recommendation + dissent.
Phase 6 — Decision Hand-off
- Memo is presented to the founder.
- Founder accepts, modifies, or rejects.
- Approved memo routes to
/cs:decidefor logging.
Output: Board Memo
Saved to ~/.claude/boardroom/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md:
# Board Memo: <topic>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Brief:** <link to /cs:brief file>
**Status:** AWAITING FOUNDER DECISION | APPROVED | REJECTED
## Question
[One sentence from the brief]
## Recommended Option
**<Option name>** — chosen because <synthesis reasoning>
## Vote Tally
| Advisor | Vote | One-Sentence Reason |
|---|---|---|
| cs-ceo-advisor | A | <reason> |
| cs-cfo-advisor | A | <reason> |
| cs-cto-advisor | B | <reason> |
| ... | | |
## Dissent
- **<dissenter>:** <unresolved concern>
## Devil's Advocate Concerns
1. **CRITICAL** — <concern> — Mitigation: <plan>
2. **HIGH** — <concern> — Mitigation: <plan>
3. **MEDIUM** — <concern> — Mitigation: <plan>
## Success & Kill Criteria
[Copied from brief, refined by the panel]
## Recommended Decision Path
- `/cs:decide` → log the decision
- `/cs:execute` → 90-day plan
- `/cs:cross-eval` → multi-model sanity check (optional, high-stakes)
- `/cs:freeze N` → cooldown lock (optional, irreversible)
Why Phase 2 Isolation Matters
If advisors see each other's positions before forming their own, they anchor. Phase 2 isolation is the single highest-leverage practice in the board-meeting protocol — it surfaces the dissents that sycophancy would have suppressed.
Why This Beats gstack's Review Chain
gstack /autoplan |
/cs:boardroom |
|
|---|---|---|
| Roles | CEO → design → eng (3) | Up to 10 C-roles |
| Order | Sequential | Phase 2 isolation, then simultaneous |
| Dissent capture | Implicit | Explicit dissent column |
| Adversarial pass | No | Phase 4 devil's advocate |
| Output | Reviewed plan | Voted memo with dissent + kill criteria |
Workflow
- Read brief from
~/.claude/briefs/<file> - Identify affected roles
- Invoke each cs-* advisor independently (Phase 2)
- Collect positions
- Run cross-examination round (Phase 3)
- Run
/em:challengeon leading option (Phase 4) - Synthesize memo (Phase 5)
- Hand off to founder (Phase 6)
Routing
/cs:decide— log approved memo/cs:cross-eval— high-stakes second opinion/cs:freeze— cooldown lock
Related
- Agent:
cs-chief-of-staff - Skills:
board-meeting,executive-mentor
Version: 1.0.0