git:20260223.111a324 to git:20260223.ef21931

---

name: ceo-council

description: Use when needing strategic project analysis from multiple independent expert perspectives. Triggers on business decisions, growth strategy, product direction, competitive analysis, or any situation where diverse C-level opinions reduce blind spots

---

# CEO Council — Independent Strategic Analysis

## Step 1: Scan Project Context

Before suggesting experts, understand the project:

1. Read `CLAUDE.md` (or `README.md` if absent)

2. Scan `.claude/rules/` for domain context

3. Glance at top-level file structure

Based on findings, **generate 4-6 expert roles tailored to THIS project**. Roles must reflect the project's actual domain, challenges, and stage.

## Step 2: Assemble the Council

Present generated roles to user via `AskUserQuestion` with `multiSelect: true`.

Prompt: "Who should join the council?" — show 4-6 options with short descriptions. User can pick "Other" to define custom roles.

**Minimum 2 experts.** If user picks 1, suggest adding at least one more for productive disagreement.

| Project Type | Typical Roles |

|-------------|--------------|

| **SaaS** | Head of Engineering, Head of Product, Head of Growth, CFO, UX Researcher |

| **Open Source** | Community Manager, Technical Architect, DevRel, Security Advisor |

| **Content / Media** | Content Strategist, Audience Analyst, Monetization Expert, Distribution Expert |

| **EdTech** | CMO, CFO, CPO, COO, Growth Advisor |

| **E-commerce** | Head of Supply Chain, Marketing Director, CTO, Customer Experience Lead |

| **Agency / Consulting** | Sales Director, Delivery Lead, Talent Manager, CFO |

## Step 3: Gather Current Data

1. Key metrics/data files identified during context scan

2. Strategy and planning documents

3. Recent decisions or changes (git log, issues)

4. Previous council analyses (if any exist)

**All experts must receive identical data context.**

## Step 4: Generate Expert Prompts

For each selected expert, create a prompt:

```

You are the [ROLE] for [PROJECT NAME]. Analyze the data below from a [DOMAIN] perspective.

Focus on:

- [3-6 specific focus areas relevant to role and project]

Data:

[CURRENT PROJECT DATA]

[Role-specific instruction: "show the math", "be the contrarian", "prioritize by effort/impact", etc.]

Respond in the same language as the data provided.

```

**Rules:**

- Each expert gets the SAME data

- Focus areas must be specific to the project, not generic

- Include a personality instruction (contrarian, pragmatic, data-driven)

- Mention project constraints the expert should know

## Step 5: Execute

Launch selected experts as **parallel Opus sub-agents** using the Task tool with `subagent_type: "general-purpose"` and `model: "opus"`.

Each sub-agent runs independently. Wait for all to complete.

## Step 6: Synthesize

After all experts report, create a synthesis:

```markdown

# Council Session: [DATE]

## Council Members

[List of selected experts and their focus]

## Context

[Current metrics/state snapshot]

## [Expert 1 Name]

[Key findings and recommendations]

## [Expert 2 Name]

[Key findings and recommendations]

## Consensus (all agree)

1. ...

2. ...

## Disagreements

| Expert | Position | Argument |

|--------|----------|----------|

## Decisions

_To be filled after discussion._

```

### Save Results

Save to a logical location:

- `docs/council-[DATE].md` — default

- Or project-specific path if context suggests one

## Common Mistakes

| Mistake | Fix |

|---------|-----|

| Generic roles not tied to project | Scan context first, tailor roles |

| Experts see different data | Always pass identical context |

| Too many experts (6+) | 3-4 is optimal for signal-to-noise |

| Skipping synthesis | The synthesis IS the value — don't skip |

| Running sequentially | Use parallel sub-agents for independence |