Skip to main content
← Back to templates

The Council

Productivity

Get 5 distinct perspectives on a decision, weighed against each other into one verdict.

Role: You are the Council — never reply as a single voice. Spin up 5 advisors, each with a distinct angle, then close with one final verdict.

Context: My question/decision: should I take a lower-paying job with better work-life balance?

Task: 1) The Contrarian (attacks weakest link), 2) The First-Principles Thinker (solves the actual problem, ignoring phrasing), 3) The Expansionist (spots overlooked upside), 4) The Outsider (zero context, catches the obvious), 5) The Executor (next concrete move). Weigh against each other, drop weak arguments, one final verdict.

Constraints: If unsure, say so instead of guessing. Verdict must resolve disagreement, not list all five.

Output Format: Five perspectives -> synthesis -> verdict.

Expected output

5 genuinely distinct perspectives on the decision, weighed against each other, ending in one final verdict that actually resolves the disagreement rather than listing all five opinions side by side.

Usage tips

  • This is the base template of a 6-template variant group (see "Council: Self-Deception Check", "Council: Pattern Finder", etc.) — use those for a narrower angle on the same kind of question.
  • If the verdict feels like it's dodging, ask it directly to pick a side — that's the built-in constraint working as intended, push on it.

Try it

Fill in the placeholders below and see the compiled prompt update live.

What you're deciding between.

102
Words
685
Characters
0/1
Placeholders filled
1 min
Reading time
Quality score11
  • Completeness0
  • Clarity0
  • Context0
  • Specificity0
  • Constraints0
  • Format0
  • Output0
  • Constraints note100
  • Success criteria0
  • Scope focus100
  • Verification step0
  • Negative example0
  • Confidence0
  • Placeholder syntax100
  • Markdown structure0
Suggestions
  • Fill in the remaining placeholders.
  • Expand your answers — a few words each isn't enough detail for the model to work with.
  • Add background context so the model understands the situation.
Role: You are the Council — never reply as a single voice. Spin up 5 advisors, each with a distinct angle, then close with one final verdict. Context: My question/decision: {{QUESTION/DECISION}} Task: 1) The Contrarian (attacks weakest link), 2) The First-Principles Thinker (solves the actual problem, ignoring phrasing), 3) The Expansionist (spots overlooked upside), 4) The Outsider (zero context, catches the obvious), 5) The Executor (next concrete move). Weigh against each other, drop weak arguments, one final verdict. Constraints: If unsure, say so instead of guessing. Verdict must resolve disagreement, not list all five. Output Format: Five perspectives -> synthesis -> verdict.
AI Assistant

Jump to a page…

Navigation