convening-experts
Convenes expert panels for problem-solving. Use when user mentions panel, experts, multiple perspectives, MECE, DMAIC, RAPID, Six Sigma, root cause analysis, strategic decisions, or process improvement.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oaustegard/claude-skills /tmp/convening-experts && cp -r /tmp/convening-experts/convening-experts ~/.claude/skills/convening-expertsSKILL.md
## SURFACE ROUTING — read first
This skill hand-rolls subagent orchestration via raw Anthropic API calls. A
managed runtime now does the same job. Which one to use depends on your surface:
- **In Claude Code (incl. CCotw): use the native runtime, NOT this skill.** If you
can invoke `/deep-research`, trigger a run with the `workflow` keyword, set
`/effort ultracode`, or spawn Task subagents — do that instead. The runtime gives
16-concurrent / 1000-agent ceilings, an approval gate, adversarial cross-review,
and in-session resume that this skill would otherwise reimplement badly. Dynamic
workflows shipped in research preview (Claude Code v2.1.154+, 2026).
- **In claude.ai chat or the bare API (no workflow runtime): use this skill.**
Parallel API instances over httpx is the only fan-out path here. `muninn_utils.dispatch`
(17 pre-built lenses) already implements this panel over orchestrating-agents' execution
model — prefer it over rebuilding the panel by hand. Proceed below.
Discriminator: do you have a native subagent/Task tool or a workflow command? Yes
→ native. No → this skill. Never reimplement the runtime where it already exists.
# Convening Experts
Convene domain experts and methodological specialists to solve problems through multi-round collaborative discussion. Experts build on each other's insights, challenge assumptions, and synthesize recommendations.
## Panel Format
### Single-Round Consultation
For simpler problems requiring multiple viewpoints:
1. **Assemble panel** (3-5 experts based on problem domain)
2. **Each expert provides independent perspective** (parallel, not sequential)
3. **Synthesize recommendations** with attribution
### Multi-Round Discussion
For complex problems requiring collaborative reasoning:
1. **Round 1**: Each expert analyzes problem independently
2. **Round 2**: Experts respond to each other's insights, building on or challenging points
3. **Round 3** (if needed): Converge on synthesis, resolve disagreements
4. **Final synthesis**: Integrated recommendations with decision framework
## Expert Roles
**Available expertise spans:**
- MSD domain experts (life sciences, engineering, manufacturing, quality, corporate functions)
- Consulting framework specialists (strategic, process improvement, innovation, systems analysis, root cause)
See [references/msd-domain-experts.md](references/msd-domain-experts.md) and [references/consulting-frameworks.md](references/consulting-frameworks.md) for complete role catalog.
Claude loads relevant references based on problem domain.
## Panel Convening Logic
Claude selects 3-5 experts based on problem characteristics:
**Problem type → Primary expert + Supporting experts**
- **Technical troubleshooting** → Domain expert + Systems Thinker + Five Whys Facilitator
- **Strategic decision** → McKinsey Consultant + relevant domain experts + SWOT Analyst
- **Process improvement** → Six Sigma Black Belt + Lean Practitioner + domain Manufacturing Engineer
- **Product innovation** → Design Thinking Facilitator + Jobs-to-Be-Done Specialist + relevant engineers
- **Root cause analysis** → Domain expert + Five Whys Facilitator + Systems Thinker
- **Market positioning** → Porter Framework Expert + Marketing Specialist + BCG Consultant
- **Cross-functional problem** → Relevant domain experts + Bain Consultant (RAPID) + Systems Thinker
## Response Format
### Single-Round Format
```
## Expert Panel: [Topic]
**Panel Members:**
- [Expert 1 Role]
- [Expert 2 Role]
- [Expert 3 Role]
---
### [Expert 1 Role]
[Independent analysis and recommendations]
### [Expert 2 Role]
[Independent analysis and recommendations]
### [Expert 3 Role]
[Independent analysis and recommendations]
---
## Synthesis
[Integrated recommendations with decision framework]
```
### Multi-Round Format
```
## Expert Panel: [Topic]
**Panel Members:**
- [Expert 1 Role]
- [Expert 2 Role]
- [Expert 3 Role]
---
## Round 1: Initial Analysis
### [Expert 1 Role]
[Initial perspective]
### [Expert 2 Role]
[Initial perspective]
### [Expert 3 Role]
[Initial perspective]
---
## Round 2: Cross-Examination
### [Expert 1 Role] responds to [Expert 2 Role]
[Builds on or challenges specific points]
### [Expert 2 Role] responds to [Expert 3 Role]
[Integration or disagreement]
### [Expert 3 Role] responds to [Expert 1 Role]
[Synthesis attempt]
---
## Round 3: Convergence (if needed)
[Experts resolve disagreements and converge]
---
## Final Synthesis
[Integrated recommendations, highlighting consensus and productive disagreements]
```
## Expert Behavior Guidelines
**Domain Experts:**
- Apply MSD context (ECL platform, regulatory constraints, validated systems)
- Use domain-appropriate terminology without over-explanation
- Prioritize practical implementation over theoretical perfection
- Flag domain-specific risks and constraints
**Framework Experts:**
- Apply frameworks systematically (show the structure)
- Adapt frameworks to problem context (not rigid application)
- Explain "why this framework" for this problem
- Integrate domain context when applying generic frameworks
**Cross-Panel Interaction:**
- Reference other experts' points specifically ("Building on [Expert]'s observation about...")
- Challenge constructively ("I see it differently because...")
- Synthesize across disciplines ("This connects [Expert 1]'s technical constraint with [Expert 2]'s business priority...")
- Flag tensions between perspectives explicitly
**Disagreement Handling:**
- Make disagreements productive (what assumptions differ?)
- Present multiple valid approaches when consensus isn't required
- Identify decision criteria to resolve disagreements
- Escalate to user if expert consensus can't be reached
## Decision Frameworks
When panel must recommend action:
**RAPID (Bain)**
- **Recommend**: Panel's recommendation with rationale
- **Agree**: Which stakeholders must agree
- **Perform**: Who implements
- **Input**: Who provides input
- **Decide**: Who makesGitHub repository access in containerized environments using REST API and credential detection. Use when git clone fails, or when accessing private repos/writing files via API.
Securely manages API credentials for multiple providers (Anthropic Claude, Google Gemini, GitHub). Use when skills need to access stored API keys for external service invocations.
Guidance for asking clarifying questions when user requests are ambiguous, have multiple valid approaches, or require critical decisions. Use when implementation choices exist that could significantly affect outcomes.
>-
>-
Browse Bluesky content via API and firehose - search posts, fetch user activity, sample trending topics, read feeds and lists, analyze and categorize accounts. Supports authenticated access for personalized feeds. Use for Bluesky research, user monitoring, trend analysis, feed reading, firehose sampling, account categorization.
Generate progressive disclosure indexes for GitHub repositories to use as Claude project knowledge. Use when setting up projects referencing external documentation, creating searchable indexes of technical blogs or knowledge bases, combining multiple repos into one index, or when user mentions "index", "github repo", "project knowledge", or "documentation reference".
Analyze and categorize Bluesky accounts by topic using keyword extraction. Use when users mention Bluesky account analysis, following/follower lists, topic discovery, account curation, or network analysis.