consensus-voting

# Consensus Voting Skill

## Purpose

Execute weighted multi-agent voting for critical decisions where domain expertise matters. Unlike debate (collaborative synthesis) or n-version (parallel generation), this skill focuses on **structured voting with expertise weighting** for security, authentication, and data-handling changes.

## Key Insight from Pattern Analysis

From `.claude/context/DISCOVERIES.md` (Pattern Applicability Analysis):

> **Voting vs Expert Judgment Selection Criteria**
>
> **When Voting Works:**
>
> - Adversarial environment (can't trust individual nodes)
> - Binary or simple discrete choices
> - No objective quality metric available
> - Consensus more valuable than correctness
>
> **When Expert Judgment Works:**
>
> - Cooperative environment (honest actors)
> - Complex quality dimensions
> - Objective evaluation criteria exist
> - Correctness more valuable than consensus

**This skill uses BOTH strategically**: Expert judgment to evaluate, weighted voting to decide.

## When to Use This Skill

**AUTO-TRIGGERS (high-risk domains):**

- Security implementations (authentication, authorization)
- Encryption and cryptographic code
- Sensitive data handling (PII, credentials)
- Permission and access control changes
- Critical algorithm implementations

**EXPLICIT TRIGGERS:**

- Major design decisions with competing approaches
- When stakeholder buy-in matters
- Binary or discrete choices needing validation
- Risk-mitigating decisions for production code

**AVOID FOR:**

- Complex trade-off analysis (use `debate-workflow` instead)
- Code generation (use `n-version-workflow` instead)
- Simple implementation choices
- Subjective quality assessments

## Configuration

### Voting Configuration

**Voting Mode:**

- `simple-majority` - 50%+ votes to pass
- `supermajority` - 66%+ votes to pass (DEFAULT for security)
- `unanimous` - 100% agreement required

**Agent Selection:**

- `auto` - Select agents based on detected domain (DEFAULT)
- `manual` - Specify a