Ask colleague — a different backend/model than you (e.g. a local vLLM Qwen) — to take a scoped repo task off your plate, then fold its answer back. The point isn't a stronger model; it's a second, independent mind, and that diversity is the value: ask-colleague review gets a candid second opinion on a diff, ask-colleague explore gets a fresh read of an area, ask-colleague write hands off a small implementation, ask-colleague feedback grades a finished work item (the ROI loop), and ask-colleague clean reaps stale/corrupt colleague/ branches a crashed run left behind (which can break git fetch). Reach for it REFLEXIVELY, the way you'd lean over to the teammate at the next desk — not only when asked: before you present or open a PR on a non-trivial committed diff, run review for a diverse second opinion; for a fresh read of an unfamiliar area whose answer is independent of your current context, run explore. Both are read-only — isolated in a throwaway git worktree, zero side effects to your tree/branch — so the reflex is always safe; the side-effecting write --apply / write --pr still needs the user's go-ahead. Triggers when the user says "ask colleague", "ask a colleague to review/explore/write this", "have colleague take a look", "get a second opinion", "ask the other model", "rate that work item", "clean up a crashed colleague run" — and still on the legacy "outsource this". Colleague's output is a second opinion to verify and own, never authority.
Install with
Claude CodeCodexCursorGitHub CopilotGemini CLI
Supported by the Atlas install prompt. Skill-specific requirements vary.
Skill stats
Skills1CategoryDeveloper toolsStars0
About this skill
Ask colleague — a different backend/model than you (e.g. a local vLLM Qwen) — to take a scoped repo task off your plate, then fold its answer back. The point isn't a stronger model; it's a second, independent mind, and that diversity is the value: ask-colleague review gets a candid second opinion on a diff, ask-colleague explore gets a fresh read of an area, ask-colleague write hands off a small implementation, ask-colleague feedback grades a finished work item (the ROI loop), and ask-colleague clean reaps stale/corrupt colleague/ branches a crashed run left behind (which can break git fetch). Reach for it REFLEXIVELY, the way you'd lean over to the teammate at the next desk — not only when asked: before you present or open a PR on a non-trivial committed diff, run review for a diverse second opinion; for a fresh read of an unfamiliar area whose answer is independent of your current context, run explore. Both are read-only — isolated in a throwaway git worktree, zero side effects to your tree/branch — so the reflex is always safe; the side-effecting write --apply / write --pr still needs the user's go-ahead. Triggers when the user says "ask colleague", "ask a colleague to review/explore/write this", "have colleague take a look", "get a second opinion", "ask the other model", "rate that work item", "clean up a crashed colleague run" — and still on the legacy "outsource this". Colleague's output is a second opinion to verify and own, never authority.
Quick start
Copy the install prompt. Use the green button above this README.
Send it to your agent. Paste it into your coding agent’s chat and send.
Review the setup. Your agent checks the skill’s instructions, requirements, and installation scope.
Ask colleague — a *different* backend/model than you (e.g. a local vLLM Qwen) — to take a scoped repo task off your plate, then fold its answer back. The point isn't a stronger model; it's a second, independent mind, and that diversity is the value: `ask-colleague review` gets a candid second opinion on a diff, `ask-colleague explore` gets a fresh read of an area, `ask-colleague write` hands off a small implementation, `ask-colleague feedback` grades a finished work item (the ROI loop), and `ask-colleague clean` reaps stale/corrupt `colleague/*` branches a crashed run left behind (which can break `git fetch`). Reach for it REFLEXIVELY, the way you'd lean over to the teammate at the next desk — not only when asked: before you present or open a PR on a non-trivial committed diff, run `review` for a diverse second opinion; for a fresh read of an unfamiliar area whose answer is independent of your current context, run `explore`. Both are read-only — isolated in a throwaway git worktree, zero side effects to your tree/branch — so the reflex is always safe; the side-effecting `write --apply` / `write --pr` still needs the user's go-ahead. Triggers when the user says "ask colleague", "ask a colleague to review/explore/write this", "have colleague take a look", "get a second opinion", "ask the other model", "rate that work item", "clean up a crashed colleague run" — and still on the legacy "outsource this". Colleague's output is a second opinion to verify and own, never authority.
About this listing
Category
Developer tools
Reported license
Apache-2.0
Listing language (estimated)
English
Review status
Not individually reviewed
Agent compatibility
Atlas installation supports Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor. Skill-specific dependencies and features are checked during setup.