What is an AI council, and when is it worth using one?
Short answer
An AI council puts the same question to several AI models from different vendors, lets each answer independently and then decides by vote, with the minority view kept on the record. It is worth it for decisions where one model's blind spot would be costly and where you want the objection, not just a verdict: a technology choice, a vendor, a price, a risky code change.
Facts at a glance
- Members in Kirat
- Claude, ChatGPT (OpenAI) and Gemini (Google)
- Majority
- Two of three
- Rounds
- At most two, enforced in code, not in a prompt
- Without a majority
- The outcome is
needs_human: the call is yours - Possible outcomes
completed,needs_human,domain_decision,limited,budget_exhausted
Why not ask one model twice?
A model checking its own work finds itself convincing. A second pass by the same model is not an independent check. Models from different families fail differently, so a council shows you the split, including who disagreed and why.
When it is not worth it
- Questions with one checkable answer: look it up.
- A handful of decisions a month: comparing answers in separate chats by hand works too.
- When you want an answer that sounds certain. A council's job is to show you the split, and sometimes the split is the answer.
Sources on this site
More questions
- How do I get a second opinion from ChatGPT and Gemini inside Claude?
- Can Claude Code get a code review from GPT and Gemini?
- What does it cost to let ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude vote on a question?
- Does Kirat work in claude.ai, the Claude mobile app or Claude Code on the web?
- Where do my API keys and questions go when Claude asks ChatGPT and Gemini through Kirat?
- Kirat, llm-council or PAL MCP: which multi-model tool fits?
- How can I check an AI answer when I can't tell whether it is right?
Terms in this answer: AI council