/ Directory / Playground / Carmack-Council
← All servers ↗ GitHub
● Community SamJHudson01 ⚡ Instant

Carmack-Council

by SamJHudson01 · SamJHudson01/Carmack-Council

Multi-agent Claude Code framework: 10 expert sub-agents (Carmack, Fowler, Kent Beck, Troy Hunt...) each review code in parallel with their own 200k context.

The Carmack Council structures development as spec → plan → implementation → review, with feedback loops. The headline innovation is parallel expert subagents: the Chair orchestrator dispatches 10 specialists simultaneously (Carmack engineering, Fowler refactoring, Kent Beck testing, Troy Hunt security, Matteo Collina backend, Brandur Postgres, Vercel perf, Simon Willison LLMs, Karri Saarinen UI, Vitaly Friedman UX). Each gets its own 200k context for its domain.

▶ Watch demo 📦 Install 💡 Use Cases

Why use it

Key features

Live Demo

What it looks like in practice

carmack-council-skill.replay ▶ ready
0/0

Install

Author repository · Claude Skills documentation

Use Cases

Real-world ways to use Carmack-Council

Get a 10-expert review on a PR before you merge it

👤 Engineers on small teams without a deep review bench ⏱ ~30 min intermediate

When to use: You'd like a security person, a perf person, a testing person to look at your PR — but there's just you.

Flow
  1. Invoke the review stage
    Carmack Council review: PR <link or diff>. Dispatch all experts.✓ Copied
    → Ten parallel reviews running, each domain-scoped
  2. Read the merged report
    Summarize the top 3 issues across all experts, ordered by severity.✓ Copied
    → Prioritized, not 10 disjoint reports
  3. Fix and re-review
    I fixed 1 and 2. Re-review with just Troy Hunt and Brandur for issue 3.✓ Copied
    → Focused re-review, not full re-dispatch

Outcome: A PR that's survived 10 expert lenses — stronger than a rubber stamp from a teammate.

Pitfalls
  • Experts disagree — The Chair merges and prioritizes — if two experts conflict, pick the one your situation weights heavier
Combine with: github

Run a feature through the full spec → plan → implement → review pipeline

👤 Small teams building a feature end-to-end with AI ⏱ ~120 min advanced

When to use: Feature is substantial and you want structured gates.

Flow
  1. Spec
    Carmack Council: spec for adding Stripe-based subscriptions.✓ Copied
    → Carmack-opinionated spec — pragmatic, not architecture-astronautic
  2. Plan + implement
    Proceed to plan, then implement in the smallest vertical slice.✓ Copied
    → Thin working slice, not a scaffolding swamp
  3. Council review
    Review with all 10 experts.✓ Copied
    → Cross-domain findings tied to actual lines

Outcome: A feature shipped with a thoroughly reviewed implementation.

Pitfalls
  • You treat expert style as gospel — They're opinions backed by real engineers' writing — they're evidence, not commandments
Combine with: github · planning-with-files

Combinations

Pair with other MCPs for X10 leverage

carmack-council-skill + github

Run council_review against a real PR, post summary as a PR comment

Council review PR #47; post the prioritized top-5 as a comment.✓ Copied
carmack-council-skill + planning-with-files

Track council findings across multiple review rounds

Use planning-with-files progress.md to track which council findings are resolved.✓ Copied

Tools

What this MCP exposes

ToolInputsWhen to callCost
spec_stage feature intent Start of a feature 0
plan_stage approved spec After spec 0
implement_stage approved plan Actually building 0
council_review diff or PR Before merge High — 10 parallel agents
single_expert_review diff + expert name Re-check a specific concern after fix 1/10 of full council

Cost & Limits

What this costs to run

API quota
None
Tokens per call
High — council_review runs 10 parallel agents
Monetary
Free — skills are local files. LLM token cost scales with parallelism.
Tip
Use single_expert_review for targeted re-checks; full council is expensive per run.

Security

Permissions, secrets, blast radius

Credential storage: No credentials — pure prompts
Data egress: None — all review happens in-session

Troubleshooting

Common errors and fixes

Wrong trigger keywords — only one expert activates

Say 'dispatch all experts' or 'full council' explicitly.

Alternatives

Carmack-Council vs others

AlternativeWhen to use it insteadTradeoff
Single-reviewer vanilla ClaudeSmall changes where 10 experts is overkillCheaper, less coverage
Human code reviewTeam has real reviewersBetter but slower — Council complements, doesn't replace

More

Resources

📖 Read the official README on GitHub

🐙 Browse open issues

🔍 Browse all 400+ MCP servers and Skills

Continue exploring

Related tools and workflows

Choose another guide for your workflow, or explore a collection.

Browse all topic collections → · See 29 new official additions →