c-level-advisor/c-level-agents/skills/boardroom/SKILL.md
/cs:boardroom <brief> — 6-phase multi-role deliberation across the C-suite with Phase 2 isolation, critic pre-screen, and synthesis. Outputs a board memo.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills boardroomInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
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.
/cs:office-hours → /cs:brief → /cs:boardroom → /cs:decide → /cs:execute → /cs:post-mortem
↑ you are here
executive-mentor/devils-advocate agent runs /em:challenge on the leading option./cs:decide for logging.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)
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.
| | 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 |
~/.claude/briefs/<file>/em:challenge on leading option (Phase 4)/cs:decide — log approved memo/cs:cross-eval — high-stakes second opinion/cs:freeze — cooldown lockcs-chief-of-staffboard-meeting, executive-mentorVersion: 1.0.0
tools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.