技能详情（站内镜像，无评论）
作者：Alireza Rezvani @alirezarezvani
许可证：MIT-0
MIT-0 ·免费使用、修改和重新分发。无需归因。
版本：v2.1.1
统计：⭐ 0 · 201 · 1 current installs · 1 all-time installs
⭐ 0
安装量（当前） 1
🛡 VirusTotal ：良性 · OpenClaw ：可疑
Package：alirezarezvani/board-meeting
安全扫描（ClawHub）
- VirusTotal ：良性
- OpenClaw ：可疑
OpenClaw 评估
The skill's instructions match its stated purpose (running structured, multi-agent board meetings) but they read from and write to persistent 'memory' files without declaring those config paths or any required privileges—an inconsistency worth addressing before installation.
目的
The skill's behaviors (running isolated role contributions, critic, synthesis, and writing approved decisions) are coherent with a 'board meeting' facilitator. However, it expects access to agent persistent memory files (e.g., memory/company-context.md and memory/board-meetings/*.md) even though the registry metadata declares no required config paths or credentials. That omission is a mismatch between stated requirements and actual operation.
说明范围
SKILL.md explicitly instructs the agent to load specific memory files (Layer 2 decisions) and to write raw transcripts and approved decisions to memory paths. Those are substantive I/O actions that persist potentially sensitive company data. The skill enforces not loading raw transcripts in Phase 1 (good) but still creates them in Phase 6. The instructions also reference an external format file (agent-protocol/SKILL.md) that is not present in …
安装机制
Instruction-only skill with no install steps, no downloaded code, and no required binaries—this is the lowest install risk and consistent with a facilitation protocol.
证书
The skill declares no environment variables or config paths but performs read/write operations on persistent memory locations. Requesting or using memory access should be declared in requires.config/paths so administrators understand what will be read and stored. There are no unrelated credentials requested, which is appropriate.
持久
The skill will persist raw transcripts and decision records to memory (Layer 1 and Layer 2). Persisting sensitive board-level transcripts is a high-impact operation; the skill does not declare this persistence in its metadata. 'always' is false and autonomous invocation is allowed (normal), but the combination of autonomous runs + undeclared persistent writes raises the blast radius if misused.
安装（复制给龙虾 AI）
将下方整段复制到龙虾中文库对话中，由龙虾按 SKILL.md 完成安装。
请把本段交给龙虾中文库（龙虾 AI）执行：为本机安装 OpenClaw 技能「Board Meeting」。简介：Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6…。
请 fetch 以下地址读取 SKILL.md 并按文档完成安装：https://raw.githubusercontent.com/openclaw/skills/refs/heads/main/skills/alirezarezvani/board-meeting/SKILL.md
（来源：yingzhi8.cn 技能库）SKILL.md
---
name: "board-meeting"
description: "Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6-phase deliberation: context loading, independent C-suite contributions (isolated, no cross-pollination), critic analysis, synthesis, founder review, and decision extraction. Use when the user invokes /cs:board, calls a board meeting, or wants structured multi-perspective executive deliberation on a strategic question."
license: MIT
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
author: Alireza Rezvani
category: c-level
domain: board-protocol
updated: 2026-03-05
frameworks: 6-phase-board, two-layer-memory, independent-contributions
---
# Board Meeting Protocol
Structured multi-agent deliberation that prevents groupthink, captures minority views, and produces clean, actionable decisions.
## Keywords
board meeting, executive deliberation, strategic decision, C-suite, multi-agent, /cs:board, founder review, decision extraction, independent perspectives
## Invoke
`/cs:board [topic]` — e.g. `/cs:board Should we expand to Spain in Q3?`
---
## The 6-Phase Protocol
### PHASE 1: Context Gathering
1. Load `memory/company-context.md`
2. Load `memory/board-meetings/decisions.md` **(Layer 2 ONLY — never raw transcripts)**
3. Reset session state — no bleed from previous conversations
4. Present agenda + activated roles → wait for founder confirmation
**Chief of Staff selects relevant roles** based on topic (not all 9 every time):
| Topic | Activate |
|-------|----------|
| Market expansion | CEO, CMO, CFO, CRO, COO |
| Product direction | CEO, CPO, CTO, CMO |
| Hiring/org | CEO, CHRO, CFO, COO |
| Pricing | CMO, CFO, CRO, CPO |
| Technology | CTO, CPO, CFO, CISO |
---
### PHASE 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)
**No cross-pollination. Each agent runs before seeing others' outputs.**
Order: Research (if needed) → CMO → CFO → CEO → CTO → COO → CHRO → CRO → CISO → CPO
**Reasoning techniques:** CEO: Tree of Thought (3 futures) | CFO: Chain of Thought (show the math) | CMO: Recursion of Thought (draft→critique→refine) | CPO: First Principles | CRO: Chain of Thought (pipeline math) | COO: Step by Step (process map) | CTO: ReAct (research→analyze→act) | CISO: Risk-Based (P×I) | CHRO: Empathy + Data
**Contribution format (max 5 key points, self-verified):**
```
## [ROLE] — [DATE]
Key points (max 5):
• [Finding] — [VERIFIED/ASSUMED] — 🟢/🟡/🔴
• [Finding] — [VERIFIED/ASSUMED] — 🟢/🟡/🔴
Recommendation: [clear position]
Confidence: High / Medium / Low
Source: [where the data came from]
What would change my mind: [specific condition]
```
Each agent self-verifies before contributing: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring. No untagged claims.
---
### PHASE 3: Critic Analysis
Executive Mentor receives ALL Phase 2 outputs simultaneously. Role: adversarial reviewer, not synthesizer.
Checklist:
- Where did agents agree too easily? (suspicious consensus = red flag)
- What assumptions are shared but unvalidated?
- Who is missing from the room? (customer voice? front-line ops?)
- What risk has nobody mentioned?
- Which agent operated outside their domain?
---
### PHASE 4: Synthesis
Chief of Staff delivers using the **Board Meeting Output** format (defined in `agent-protocol/SKILL.md`):
- Decision Required (one sentence)
- Perspectives (one line per contributing role)
- Where They Agree / Where They Disagree
- Critic's View (the uncomfortable truth)
- Recommended Decision + Action Items (owners, deadlines)
- Your Call (options if founder disagrees)
---
### PHASE 5: Human in the Loop ⏸️
**Full stop. Wait for the founder.**
```
⏸️ FOUNDER REVIEW — [Paste synthesis]
Options: ✅ Approve | ✏️ Modify | ❌ Reject | ❓ Ask follow-up
```
**Rules:**
- User corrections OVERRIDE agent proposals. No pushback. No "but the CFO said..."
- 30-min inactivity → auto-close as "pending review"
- Reopen any time with `/cs:board resume`
---
### PHASE 6: Decision Extraction
After founder approval:
- **Layer 1:** Write full transcript → `memory/board-meetings/YYYY-MM-DD-raw.md`
- **Layer 2:** Append approved decisions → `memory/board-meetings/decisions.md`
- Mark rejected proposals `[DO_NOT_RESURFACE]`
- Confirm to founder with count of decisions logged, actions tracked, flags added
---
## Memory Structure
```
memory/board-meetings/
├── decisions.md # Layer 2 — founder-approved only (Phase 1 loads this)
├── YYYY-MM-DD-raw.md # Layer 1 — full transcripts (never auto-loaded)
└── archive/YYYY/ # Raw transcripts after 90 days
```
**Future meetings load Layer 2 only.** Never Layer 1. This prevents hallucinated consensus.
---
## Failure Mode Quick Reference
| Failure | Fix |
|---------|-----|
| Groupthink (all agree) | Re-run Phase 2 isolated; force "strongest argument against" |
| Analysis paralysis | Cap at 5 points; force recommendation even with Low confidence |
| Bikeshedding | Log as async action item; return to main agenda |
| Role bleed (CFO making product calls) | Critic flags; exclude from synthesis |
| Layer contamination | Phase 1 loads decisions.md only — hard rule |
---
## References
- `templates/meeting-agenda.md` — agenda format
- `templates/meeting-minutes.md` — final output format
- `references/meeting-facilitation.md` — conflict handling, timing, failure modes