Multi-Model Consultation
Query advisory subagents (GPT, Gemini, Grok) based on user request. Spawn ONLY the models explicitly mentioned.
Available Models
| Model | Subagent | Strengths |
|---|---|---|
| GPT | @gpt | Strong reasoning, broad knowledge |
| Gemini | @gemini | Good at synthesis, multimodal |
| Grok | @grok | X/Twitter data, less filtered, contrarian |
Trigger Patterns - MATCH EXACTLY
Parse user request and spawn ONLY requested models:
| User Says | Spawn |
|---|---|
| "ask gpt..." | @gpt only |
| "ask gemini..." | @gemini only |
| "ask grok..." | @grok only |
| "ask gpt and gemini..." | @gpt + @gemini |
| "ask gemini and grok..." | @gemini + @grok |
| "ask gpt and grok..." | @gpt + @grok |
| "ask both" (after mentioning 2) | the 2 mentioned |
| "ask all three..." | @gpt + @gemini + @grok |
| "ask all models..." | @gpt + @gemini + @grok |
Default behavior: If ambiguous, ask user which model(s) they want. Do NOT default to all three.
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Requested Models
Parse user request carefully:
- •Single model mentioned → spawn only that one
- •Two models mentioned → spawn only those two
- •"all three" / "all models" → spawn all three
- •Ambiguous → ask for clarification
Step 2: Form Your Own Opinion First
Before spawning subagents:
- •What's your initial assessment?
- •What are the key considerations?
- •What's your preliminary recommendation?
Step 3: Spawn Requested Models in Parallel
Spawn ONLY the models user requested, all at once:
# Single model example Task 1: @gpt - [the question] # Two models example Task 1: @gpt - [the question] Task 2: @gemini - [the question] # All three example Task 1: @gpt - [the question] Task 2: @gemini - [the question] Task 3: @grok - [the question]
Step 4: Synthesize Responses
Adapt synthesis to number of models:
Single model:
## My Analysis [Your assessment] ## [Model]'s Perspective [Summary of response] ## Synthesis [Compare your view with model's, final recommendation]
Two models:
## My Analysis [Your assessment] ## [Model 1]'s Perspective [Summary] ## [Model 2]'s Perspective [Summary] ## Synthesis ### Agreement [Where perspectives align] ### Divergence [Where they differ] ### Recommendation [Final recommendation with rationale]
Three models:
## My Analysis [Your assessment] ## GPT's Perspective [Summary] ## Gemini's Perspective [Summary] ## Grok's Perspective [Summary] ## Synthesis ### Agreement [Where all align] ### Divergence [Where they differ and why] ### Recommendation [Final recommendation, which arguments most compelling]
Decision Framework
When Models Agree
- •High confidence in shared conclusion
- •Note if reasoning differs despite same answer
When Models Disagree
- •Identify root cause (assumptions? priorities? training data?)
- •Evaluate which reasoning fits THIS context
- •Your role: break tie with reasoned judgment
When You Disagree
- •State your position clearly
- •Explain why their reasoning doesn't apply
- •Be open to being wrong
NEVER
- •NEVER spawn models not requested - respect user's choice
- •NEVER default to all three when user asks for one or two
- •NEVER spawn sequentially - always parallel
- •NEVER skip forming your own opinion first
- •NEVER just average answers - synthesize with judgment
- •NEVER hide disagreement - surface it explicitly
Examples
Single model: User: "ask gpt about early bird vs night owl" → Spawn @gpt only, synthesize with your view
Two models: User: "ask gpt and gemini about monorepo vs polyrepo" → Spawn @gpt + @gemini only, synthesize both with your view
All three: User: "ask all three about best testing strategy" → Spawn @gpt + @gemini + @grok, full synthesis