consensus-coder

name: consensus-coder description: Multi-model consensus coding workflow. Use when you need multiple LLMs (Opus, Gemini, Codex) to collaboratively diagnose a coding problem, propose solutions, debate alternatives, and reach consensus before implementation. Ideal for complex architectural decisions, refactoring strategies, or tricky algorithmic problems where diverse perspectives improve solution quality.

Consensus Coder

A collaborative multi-model workflow that achieves consensus on coding solutions through structured debate and voting.

How It Works

Phase 1: Diagnosis & Proposal (Opus)

1. Opus 4.5 analyzes the problem and proposes 3 distinct approaches
2. Each proposal includes: rationale, trade-offs, estimated complexity

Phase 2: Review & Vote (Gemini 2.5 + Codex)

1. Gemini 2.5 reviews all 3 proposals and casts a vote with reasoning
2. Codex reviews all 3 proposals and casts a vote with reasoning
3. Opus votes on its own proposals or agrees with a reviewer's choice

Phase 3: Consensus or Iteration

• If unanimous: Opus creates implementation plan → Auggie implements
• If split: The dissenting model(s) propose alternative solutions → revote
• Max 5 iterations: If no consensus after 5 rounds, escalate to you for human decision

Phase 4: Implementation (Auggie)

Once consensus achieved:

1. Opus creates detailed implementation plan
2. Auggie executes the plan with your Codebake tasks

Usage

Start a consensus session:

problem: "Your coding problem or refactoring challenge"
context: "Additional context (framework, constraints, goals)"

The workflow will:

1. Show each model's proposals and reasoning
2. Display vote tallies each round
3. Auto-iterate on disagreement
4. Ask for your decision if stuck after 5 rounds
5. Implement the winning solution

Voting Format

Each model votes using this structure:

**Vote:** [Proposal A | Proposal B | Proposal C]
**Confidence:** [High | Medium | Low]
**Reasoning:** [Why this proposal wins]
**Concerns:** [Any reservations or caveats]

Iteration Rules

• Unanimous (3-0): Move to implementation
• 2-1 split: Dissenting model proposes alternative → revote
• No consensus after 5 rounds: Escalate to human decision (you decide)

When dissenting, the minority model must articulate:

• Specific concern with the winning proposal
• What their alternative addresses that others miss

Implementation

Auggie executes with:

• Opus's detailed plan as the spec
• Your Codebake workspace for task tracking
• Automatic error feedback loops

Token Cost

Expect ~8-12k tokens per consensus cycle (3 proposal reviews + voting + iteration logic). Multiple iterations can be expensive, so this works best for high-impact decisions.

See references/ for voting logic, prompt templates, and consensus rules.