README.md

fusion-deck

A Claude Code decision-and-execution skill that spends extra models only when the risk earns it. It can fan a hard question to independent panelists, keep answers blind, have Claude judge the result, and disclose the panel that actually ran. Around that core are mechanical workflows for planning, context curation, investigation, orchestration, optimization, refactoring, and handoff.

It is Markdown procedures plus Bash / Python helpers—not an MCP server, model dashboard, or OpenRouter replacement.

Why a panel — the measured part

OpenRouter benchmarked this panel shape on DRACO (deep research, 100 tasks across 10 domains). Their numbers, for their Fusion pipeline, on the models of that era — fusion-deck runs the same shape locally but has not been independently benchmarked (different judge scaffolding, CLI-subscription model variants, and the seats now run newer models):

Setup	DRACO	vs. best solo model
The panel shape fusion-deck runs — Claude + GPT + Gemini, Claude judges	68.3%	+3.0
Claude + GPT pair, Claude judges	67.6%	+2.3
Best frontier model, solo	65.3%	— (baseline)
GPT seat's model, solo	60.0%	−5.3
Judge's own model, solo	58.8%	−6.5

Read it from the bottom up: the panel beats the best of its own members by 3 points, and beats its average member by far more — the judge's own model gains ~9.5 points from sitting on a panel instead of answering alone. Even the same model run twice cold and judged gains ~6.7. Independent tries catch each other's mistakes; that is the whole product.

Data: OpenRouter, "Fusion beats frontier". fusion-deck runs the panel via your own Claude / codex / agy subscriptions — no router, nothing leaves for a third party.

What a panel catches that one model reliably misses

These are mechanisms, not marketing — each maps to a specific instruction in references/:

• Confident stale facts. Models share training-data errors, so one model asking itself twice tends to agree with itself. A cross-family panelist that actually read the source contradicts the recitation, and the judge is instructed to settle it by running the cheap check — never by headcount (judge-rubric.md: "headcount is not adjudication").
• Wrong-premise answers. A single model usually answers inside your question's framing, even when the framing is the bug. Every panelist here is explicitly licensed to say "the premise is mistaken" instead of answering within it (panel-prompt.md).
• Review blind spots. In /fusion-review, findings that two reviewers hit independently are near-certain real (consensus = precision); findings only one family notices are exactly the ones a single reviewer run would have missed (unique insights = coverage). Disagreements don't get averaged away — the judge reads the disputed file:line and rules (in one internal run, two seats disagreed on whether a bare except: was intentional; the judge read the line — it swallowed KeyboardInterrupt).
• Self-serving synthesis. The judge writes its five-section analysis (consensus / contradictions / partial coverage / unique insights / blind spots) before drafting the final answer, so it can't decide first and rationalize after.
• Fake panels. A seat that errored, timed out, or returned a byte-sized error banner is reported absent — the answer must disclose the realized PANEL_STATE and the actual models that answered. Degraded runs never masquerade as premium.

When it pays for itself

A panel costs roughly 3 model calls and a few minutes; it is priced for decisions where being wrong costs hours or days — an architecture choice you'd live with for months, a security-sensitive diff, a root cause you're about to "fix" at the wrong layer. For those, one avoided wrong call covers a long tail of panels. For trivia and routine edits, the skill's own router says: don't convene a panel — answer directly (/fusion-auto routes low-risk work to a single model by design).

The context layer, measured

A panel is only as good as what its seats can see. Every seat gets the same mechanical repo map, the seats that can be sandboxed get a disposable snapshot of the code under review, and the timeouts stop lying about which knob controls them. All figures below are from this repo's own benchmarks — same run, same 20-symbol diff, 31dbda2 against v2.2. scripts/charts/bench_step1.sh re-runs the Step-1 timings; it works inside a disposable snapshot, which by construction has no gitignored build tree, so what it prints is a lower bound on a repo that has one.

Where the time went. Caller search dominated the old mechanical phase, and two things were wrong with it. It used grep -rnw, which reads .git and every gitignored build tree before filtering — git grep skips both, and on a repo with a large node_modules that step alone went from 491 s to 0.9 s. And it spawned one process per symbol; a single multi-pattern pass does the same work once, with the per-symbol cap re-applied afterwards so one hot name still cannot eat the packet. Map build fell the same way: two shell while read loops over ~1,300 lines cost 823 ms of a 978 ms warm build on bash 3.2 loop overhead alone, and became one awk pass each. What the context gained. The baseline map held zero C# signatures on a 142-file C# repo: the extension list and the signature pattern both missed modifier-led languages, and the run still exited 0. Prose now contributes a capped heading outline instead of empty blocks, which is the −217. A warm rebuild costs only the files whose content changed, so the map is rebuilt before every fan-out rather than cached and trusted.
Put the limit above the work, not beside it. The Antigravity seat's own --print-timeout was hardcoded to 300 s while the documented FUSION_PANEL_TIMEOUT was 600 s — so the documented knob had no effect on that seat at all. Three measured runs landed at 204 / 304 / 240 s. The one that timed out finished in 240 s on retry, unchanged: the cap was mispositioned, not the prompt. Both layers now derive from one knob. Truncation is disclosed, never silent. file_map is always complete — hiding that a file exists is the one thing a map must not do — so a file over budget is still named, just without signatures, and the run reports MAP_STATE=TRUNCATED with the count.

And the part worth being honest about. This was built by running /fusion-review on itself, pass after pass. The panel caught 45 defects the author missed — a symlink that exfiltrated files from outside the repo, a worktree whose .git pointer walked a seat back to the live checkout, and a per-symbol cap that silently dropped a symbol's only call-site whenever it shared a hunk with a busier name. Eleven more were introduced while fixing the others.

The sharpest data point is the optimisation pass. Before shipping it the author wrote a 12-case edge-condition suite — spaces in paths, dots in directory names, empty caches, brand-new symbols — and it found nothing. The panel then found six real defects in the same code, every one silent. The remediation for those was reviewed in turn, and the panel found eight more — including a critical one the first fix had opened: a symlink filter that closed the harmless shape and left the exfiltrating one, so a file outside the repo had its contents summarised into the artifact handed to every external seat.

Five consecutive times the author declared a defect fixed and the panel showed the fix closed only the reproduction case: a symlink filter that missed a symlinked parent directory, then one that missed a hardlink, then one that guarded the file listing while the reading stayed open — the map still summarised outside bytes into the artifact while stderr claimed the file was excluded, and cached the result under an honest blob SHA so a clean checkout served the leak forever. Every time the suite was green, and every time the new test encoded the reproduction rather than the defect.

What finally closed it was not another filter. codemap is now fed blobs from git's object store instead of worktree paths: an object store cannot be redirected by a symlink, a hardlink, or a mount, so the whole class disappears rather than being enumerated. Five passes of guarding the listing never touched the reading. The author's tests probe the shapes the author has thought of — that is the failure mode a second reader exists to cover, and it is why the middle bar is not an embarrassment to hide.

What ships

Situation	Command	Default behavior
Hard decision / trade-off	/fusion	Blind panel → judge
Let risk choose the workflow	/fusion-auto	Rule-based routing; escalate only when needed
Maximum-quality pass	/fusion-ultra	Wide panel, contradiction matrix, targeted probes, verifier
Review a diff or plan	/fusion-review	Panel-backed prioritized findings
Investigate a bug	/fusion-investigate	Evidence first; panel only if hypotheses survive
Turn a vague ask into a contract	/fusion-plan	Single-model Workflow Contract by default
Curate only relevant repo context	/fusion-context	Token-budgeted Context Pack
Execute a multi-step change	/fusion-orchestrate	Scoped agents with verify-before-next dispatch
Improve a measured metric	/fusion-optimize	Baseline → one change → re-measure
Preserve behavior while cleaning structure	/fusion-refactor	Analyze → plan → guided execution
Transfer work cleanly	/fusion-handoff	Handoff Capsule
Re-anchor a drifting session	/fusion-remind	Compact command / invariant map

The exact contracts live in commands/ and references/. The executable checks live in scripts/.

Install

git clone https://github.com/raydocs/fusion-deck.git
bash fusion-deck/install.sh

By default this symlinks the repo to ~/.claude/skills/fusion-deck and writes twelve wrappers to ~/.claude/commands/. Then run /reload-skills in Claude Code or restart it.

Alternatives:

bash install.sh --copy       # install an allowlisted copy
bash install.sh --force      # replace an existing install
bash install.sh --uninstall  # remove skill + generated wrappers

CLAUDE_SKILLS_DIR and CLAUDE_COMMANDS_DIR override the destinations.

Panel requirements and runtime honesty

Claude is the in-process panelist and judge. External seats are discovered from:

• codex for the GPT seat
• agy for the Gemini seat; legacy gemini is opt-in

A missing or failed seat is never silently presented as a full panel. Premium commands stop unless the required external CLIs are available; deliberate degraded execution requires FUSION_ALLOW_DEGRADED=1, and the result must still disclose PANEL_STATE. Runtime failures write a manifest and use a non-zero exit rather than fabricating success.

Check this machine without calling paid models:

bash scripts/detect_panel.sh
bash scripts/smoke_test.sh

First use

/fusion Should this checkout path use optimistic or pessimistic locking?
/fusion-auto review my staged diff
/fusion-plan add a health endpoint with tests
/fusion-context prepare the checkout code for another agent
/fusion-handoff authentication refactor

Use a panel for expensive-to-reverse judgment, not trivia. A common feature chain is:

/fusion-plan → /fusion-context → /fusion-orchestrate → /fusion-handoff

Safety boundaries

• Panel prompts may contain source code; review mode disables web access for untrusted diffs.
• Local ledgers live under .fusion/runs/ and self-ignore; prompts and code should not be committed accidentally.
• Do not put credentials in prompts, Context Packs, command files, or manifests.
• All scripts/… paths in procedures resolve from the installed skill root, not the target project.

The three lineages

fusion-deck fuses three lineages into one skill:

• Panel → judge (from fusion-fable): the same prompt goes to several models at once and blind, then the judge model writes the final answer. The pipeline can't be reversed.
• Contract + honesty (from the goal-meta lineage): an objective, finishing criteria defined before work, honest status states, and an escape hatch — emitted as a Claude Code Workflow Contract (not Codex's /goal).
• Context + orchestration (from RepoPrompt CE): a curated Context Pack, a shared plan, scoped subagent briefs, verify-then-dispatch-fresh, and a Handoff Capsule — plus evidence-first investigation, a measured optimize loop, behavior-preserving refactor, a tree-sitter→ctags→grep codemap, evidence-gated context discovery, and worktree isolation.

Cognition/Devin measured that delegation backfires when subtle intent matters — which is why the orchestrator keeps judgment and never implements, and why codemap/export stay thin helpers rather than a mini-RepoPrompt.

Development verification

bash scripts/smoke_test.sh                                   # 312 assertions, offline
python3 scripts/route_task.py --check tests/router_cases.yml
node scripts/charts/gen_readme_charts.js assets/readme/charts # regenerate the README charts

The smoke test is offline and must not invoke paid model calls. The chart generator is deterministic — re-running it on unchanged data produces a byte-identical result, so a dirty git diff there means the numbers moved.

License

MIT