Opencouncil Contract Inspector banner
vikashjeyaraman vikashjeyaraman

Opencouncil Contract Inspector

AI community

Description

Proven 2026 Multi-Agent AI Review System – Verdict-Driven Quality Control

Installation

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

README

![preview](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vikashjeyaraman/opencouncil-contract-inspector/main/preview.svg)

🏛️ VeritasBoard — Multi-Agent Deliberative Quality Engine

*Where artificial intelligence meets the rigor of a corporate boardroom, producing decisions that withstand the scrutiny of ten simulated experts and ten veteran reviewers.*

[![Download](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vikashjeyaraman/opencouncil-contract-inspector/main/button.svg)](https://vikashjeyaraman.github.io/opencouncil-contract-inspector/)

🌟 Overview

VeritasBoard is an **AI orchestration framework** that reimagines quality control through simulated institutional wisdom. Rather than a single model generating output, VeritasBoard convenes **two distinct chambers** of artificial agents: a **Drafting Council** of ten specialist employees who produce preliminary work, and an **Oversight Board** of ten industry-veteran reviewers who challenge, refine, and validate that work. The user sees only the final, reconciled verdict — a distillation of twenty distinct perspectives, each engineered to resist sycophancy and groupthink.

This repository houses the core architecture, configuration templates, and integration modules that enable any language model to participate in structured, multi-agent deliberation. VeritasBoard is not merely a wrapper; it is a **cognitive constitution** — a set of rules that governs how artificial minds debate, dissent, and converge.


🧠 The Anti-Sycophancy Imperative

Modern language models suffer from a well-documented tendency: they agree with users. They seek approval. They hedge. VeritasBoard addresses this through **deliberative adversarial review**. Each of the ten Oversight Board members is prompted not to validate, but to *interrogate* — to find logical flaws, unsupported claims, hidden assumptions, and rhetorical gambits. The drafting agents, in turn, must defend their positions with evidence and structured reasoning.

The result is output that