agentsclimarketplace

Lean review council

Skill r-irbe/proof-skills/skills/lean-review-council

APM-installable agent skills for Lean 4 and Mathlib4 — proof tactics, math domains, review and research workflows, generic tooling.

Install
npx -y skills add r-irbe/proof-skills --skill lean-review-council

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

USE FOR: orchestrating a 5-member Lean 4 proof review council (Σ Kernel Guardian, Φ Statement Oracle, Ν Novelty Scout, Λ Quality Architect, Ω Integration Sentinel); running RALPH (Review-Analyze-Learn-Plan-Handle) loops at member / council / project / meta scales; structured voting with structured-disagreement-resolution (SDR); council topology selection (Star / Pipeline / Mesh / Hierarchical / Swarm / Ring / Hub-Spoke); maximum-parallel agent dispatch with cascading completion handlers; specification lifecycle (requirements → design → docs); inter-council collaboration; Zettelkasten knowledge synthesis; calibration scoring; enforcement tactics. DO NOT USE FOR: reviewing one Lean proof in isolation (use @lean-proof-review); writing a proof (use @lean-proof); running CI scripts (use @lean-enforcement); single-skill council convocation when no multi-layer review is needed (use the relevant skill directly). TRIGGERS: review council, RALPH loop, council vote, SDR, council topology, kernel guardian, statement oracle, novelty scout, quality architect, integration sentinel, meta-council, council session.

SKILL.md

10.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Lean 4 Review Council

A formal review council of five voting AI agents that collectively execute the lean-proof-review skill with 99.99% reliability and resilience. Each member specializes in one verification layer. The council process prevents agent collapse, maximizes parallel work, enforces correctness through programmatic tactics, and continuously improves its own methodology.

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                     REVIEW COUNCIL ARCHITECTURE                  │
│                                                                  │
│  5 Members × RALPH loops × 7 Topologies × Cascading Dispatch    │
│                                                                  │
│  Σ Kernel Guardian ── formal soundness (Layer 1)                 │
│  Φ Statement Oracle ── statement correctness (Layer 2)           │
│  Ν Novelty Scout ── non-triviality & novelty (Layer 3)          │
│  Λ Quality Architect ── proof quality & readability (Layer 4)    │
│  Ω Integration Sentinel ── cross-cutting coherence (Layer 5)     │
│                                                                  │
│  + Specifier, Designer, Implementer, Documenter, Synthesizer,    │
│    Planner, Enforcer — cascading parallel dispatch               │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Routing

  • USE FOR: orchestrating a 5-member Lean 4 proof review council with RALPH loops at member / council / project / meta scales; structured voting with SDR; council topology selection; maximum-parallel agent dispatch with cascading completion handlers; specification lifecycle, inter-council collaboration, Zettelkasten synthesis, calibration scoring, enforcement tactics.
  • DO NOT USE FOR: reviewing one Lean proof in isolation (delegate to @lean-proof-review); writing a proof (delegate to @lean-proof); running CI scripts (delegate to @lean-enforcement); single-skill council convocation when no multi-layer review is needed (use the relevant skill directly).
  • TRIGGERS: review council, RALPH loop, council vote, SDR, council topology, kernel guardian, statement oracle, novelty scout, quality architect, integration sentinel, meta-council, council session.

Workflow

  1. Identify the scope (theorem / file / module / project / meta-council cross-module).
  2. Pick a topology (Part 4 of the handbook — Star for first pass, Pipeline for sequential dependencies, Hierarchical for project scale, Hub-Spoke for inter-council).
  3. Run Part 12 — Execution Protocol (kept inline below) end-to-end.
  4. On a blocking finding, enter SDR (handbook Part 3); on approval, dispatch Documenter + Synthesizer for the session report and Zettelkasten update.
  5. Aggregate session reports at the module / project level; convene the Meta-Council for cross-module coherence when needed.

Recovery & STOP

  • STOP if more than two members report 🔴 votes on a single artifact — enter SDR (handbook Part 3) before any further dispatch.
  • STOP if RALPH loop iteration count exceeds 3 without convergence — escalate to the Meta-Council (handbook Part 10) or handoff to @lean-research to widen evidence.
  • STOP if the Documenter or Synthesizer fails to produce a session report — the council session is incomplete; do not advance to module-level aggregation.

Handoffs

  • Predecessors: agent:gateway (top-level invocation), skill:lean-proof-review (when a layer needs council-scale escalation), skill:lean-specification (specification lifecycle entry), skill:lean-research (when evidence widening is required mid-session).
  • Successors: skill:lean-proof-review (layered re-review on a fix), skill:lean-enforcement (CI gates triggered by the council vote), skill:lean-doc-feedback (doc sync once review approved), skill:lean-zettelkasten (knowledge synthesis), skill:research-council (inter-council collaboration via Hub-Spoke).

Detailed reference

Full council methodology (Parts 1–11, 13–15, Appendices A/B/C) lives in references/lean-review-council-handbook.md. Load that file when convening a council session; the SKILL.md only carries the dispatch contract and the quick-start Execution Protocol (Part 12) kept inline below.

SectionTopicCovers
Part 1The Five Council MembersΣ / Φ / Ν / Λ / Ω personas, skills, mandates
Part 2The RALPH LoopReview-Analyze-Learn-Plan-Handle at all 4 scales
Part 3Voting and Disagreement ResolutionVote schema, SDR protocol
Part 4Council TopologiesStar / Pipeline / Mesh / Hierarchical / Swarm / Ring / Hub-Spoke
Part 5Parallel Agent ArchitectureMaximum-parallel dispatch + cascading completion
Part 6Specification-Review-Fix CycleRequirements + Design + Docs lifecycle
Part 7Document TemplatesSession report, Zettel, ADR, retro templates
Part 8Zettelkasten Knowledge ManagementSynthesis protocol
Part 9Continuous Self-ImprovementMeta-loop
Part 10Inter-Council CollaborationHub-Spoke between review + research councils
Part 11Todo List ManagementPre / during / post session
Part 13Pairwise Collaboration MechanicsMember-pair protocols
Part 14Calibration Scoring & Reliability99.99% target methodology
Part 15Enforcement Tactics & LintersProgrammatic gates
Appendix AReliability and Resilience MechanismsAnti-collapse safeguards
Appendix BSkills RequiredCross-skill dispatch matrix
Appendix CComplete Agent Dispatch ReferenceFull agent-launch incantations

Part 12 — Execution Protocol

Starting a Council Review Session

1. Planner decomposes scope into reviewable units
2. FOR EACH unit:
   a. Launch 5 member agents in parallel (Star topology)
   b. Each member executes RALPH Review + Analyze
   c. Synchronize: collect all findings
   d. Vote
   e. IF blocked: enter SDR
   f. IF approved: proceed
   g. Launch Documenter to record session report
   h. Launch Synthesizer to update Zettelkasten
3. Planner collects all session reports
4. Launch Documenter to produce module-level report
5. IF project-level: Meta-council reviews cross-module coherence

Agent Launch Commands

For the orchestrating agent to dispatch council members:

Dispatch Σ: "You are Sigma, the Kernel Guardian. Execute Layer 1 (Formal 
Soundness) review of [artifact]. Run #print axioms on all theorems. Check 
for sorry, admit, native_decide. Verify lake build passes. Report findings 
using the Council Session Report template. Vote ✅/🟡/🟠/🔴."

Dispatch Φ: "You are Phi, the Statement Oracle. Execute Layer 2 (Statement
Correctness) review of [artifact]. Translate every theorem to English. Run
the missing-hypothesis checklist. Check for vacuous truth. Cross-reference
with the repository's source specification or paper. Report findings using the Council Session Report
template. Vote ✅/🟡/🟠/🔴."

Dispatch Ν: "You are Nu, the Novelty Scout. Execute Layer 3 (Non-Triviality) 
review of [artifact]. Run exact? on all goals. Check local tactic/helper modules for
duplicates. Classify novelty. Report findings using the Council Session 
Report template. Vote ✅/🟡/🟠/🔴."

Dispatch Λ: "You are Lambda, the Quality Architect. Execute Layer 4 (Proof 
Quality) review of [artifact]. Count tactic steps. Flag anti-patterns. 
Check tactic priority compliance. Verify docstrings. Report findings using 
the Council Session Report template. Vote ✅/🟡/🟠/🔴."

Dispatch Ω: "You are Omega, the Integration Sentinel. Execute cross-cutting 
review of [artifact]. Check autoImplicit, naming conventions, section 
organization, module imports, paper cross-references, simplex constraints. 
Report findings using the Council Session Report template. Vote ✅/🟡/🟠/🔴. 
As council chair, collect all votes and produce the final decision."

See also

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most plan spec skills give

Counted across 1,100 of the 1,860 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06

  • ask one question at a timein 46 of 1100, across 38 files
  • Break plans into vertical slicesin 28 of 1100, across 10 files
  • Publish issues in dependency orderin 27 of 1100, across 9 files
  • Iterate until user approves the breakdownin 24 of 1100, across 6 files
  • Explore the repository to understand the codebase statein 24 of 1100, across 7 files
  • Use domain glossary vocabularyin 23 of 1100, across 5 files
  • Apply correct triage labels to published issuesin 23 of 1100, across 5 files
  • Write failing tests before implementation codein 23 of 1100, across 18 files
  • Prefer AFK slices over HITLin 22 of 1100, across 7 files
  • ask clarifying questions until requirements are concretein 21 of 1100, across 13 files
  • Respect existing architecture decision recordsin 20 of 1100, across 5 files
  • write a specification before writing any codein 20 of 1100, across 12 files

Said here and by no other author read

  • identify review scope
  • select council topology
  • launch five member agents in parallel
  • collect member findings and votes
  • enter structured disagreement resolution if blocked
  • dispatch documenter and synthesizer upon approval

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.