amart-builder

Claude Orchestrator Skill — AI skill for Claude Code

AI community

Toggleable Claude Code mode: the big model orchestrates, cheap models do the grunt work.

How to install Claude Orchestrator Skill

This entry records only its repository, not the path inside it, so there is no exact command to give. Open amart-builder/claude-orchestrator-skill and copy the folder into ~/.claude/skills/, or the file into ~/.claude/agents/.

What Claude Orchestrator Skill does

Toggleable Claude Code mode: the big model orchestrates, cheap models do the grunt work. Cuts token spend without losing intelligence.

Alternatives in AI

  • Paritok 4b V1 — Non-destructive compression gateway for AI coding agents 1.4k ★
  • Claw Empire — Command Your AI Agent Empire from the CEO Desk — A local-first AI agent office simulator that orchestrates CLI 1.1k ★
  • CliRelay — Self-hosted AI gateway for coding CLIs — one OpenAI/Claude/Gemini/Codex-compatible endpoint, with a multi-tena 1k ★

README

Multi-Model Orchestrator Skills

Two native skills that make a frontier model the CEO of a cross-vendor agent team. Same doctrine in both; the seats are chosen by whichever model is driving.

Driving the session Writes the code Plan advisor Reviewer (fresh context, adversarial) Skill
Claude Fable 5.1 GPT-5.6 Sol, DO mode, high effort the driver Claude Opus 5, read-only orchestrator for Claude Code
Claude Opus 5 the driver GPT-5.6 Sol, read-only GPT-5.6 Sol, read-only orchestrator for Claude Code
GPT-5.6 Sol the driver Claude Opus 5, read-only Claude Opus 5, read-only codex-orchestrator for Codex and ChatGPT desktop

Two invariants hold across every row:

  • Whoever built it never certifies it, and the reviewer always comes from a different family than the builder. This is the whole point. Two runs of the same model make correlated mistakes, because the same training produces the same blind spots, so a second pass mostly agrees with the first. A model from a different lab fails in different places. The corollary lives in both skills: agreement between the two is weaker evidence than it feels, and disagreement is a signal to slow down rather than to average.
  • The driver makes every final call. Advisers and reviewers produce evidence and disagreement. They never hold the decision, and a review is never a rubber stamp or a veto.

Both share one North Star with two goals in order: maximize the driver's performance on multi-disciplinary work, and minimize the tokens spent getting it. Quality wins when the two genuinely collide, but the bet is that they rarely do. To that end the skill grants the driver two things it does not otherwise use freely: a frontier peer from another model family to think alongside it and to check its work, and a roster of cheaper but still capable workers to hand bounded work to whenever that saves tokens without costing quality. A short precedence l