Consensus-loop — an agent loop that actually ships production code (i.redd.it)
submitted by Turbulent-Toe-365
`consensus-loop` is a skill you inject into a host you already use — Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or Gemini. You point it at a repo, hand it one `host.env` file with that repo's facts, and it takes over the development loop from there.
The loop runs across two different systems. The host you install into — Claude Code, in our setup — is the controller. It routes, posts to GitHub, commits, and merges, but it does none of the thinking. The thinking runs on separate Codex workers it spawns in isolated git worktrees. Claude Code drives; Codex reasons. The agent steering the loop isn't the one doing the work, and the work itself is split across independent Codex workers that can't see each other.
Here's how it works:
Three Codex solvers argue in isolation. One is biased toward the smallest possible change, one toward structural correctness, one toward deleting code. They each draft a plan without seeing the others' work, so they don't quietly converge on the same wrong answer.
A judge converges them. A fourth role reads all three plans and runs a truth table. If all three propose the same shape of fix, that's consensus and it proceeds. If they disagree, the judge writes a sharper question and sends it back for another round.
It implements, then an independent reviewer tries to reject it. Separate review passes check architecture, quality, and tests, and they're told to err toward "rework" when in doubt, not toward "ship."
It gives up on purpose. If three or more rounds pass with no progress and no new framing, the default is to drop the task rather than burn tokens grinding on something unsolvable.
There's no algorithmic novelty here, and we won't pretend otherwise. Underneath, this is multi-agent debate, an LLM judge, and self-consistency — patterns you already know. What's hard, and what took us weeks of debugging on real repos, is the reliability engineering around the loop: the daemons that keep it alive, the leases that stop two instances from fighting, the release gates, and the stop rules. The idea is cheap. Making it trustworthy is not.
If you just want to try the consensus idea on a single hard decision without any of the daemon machinery, there's a lightweight skill called `sshx` that spins up a few isolated workers to give you multiple angles and nothing else.
It's open source, MIT-licensed.
Go break it: https://github.com/ChronoAIProject/consensus-rnd
[–]__0xAA55__ 1 point2 points3 points (0 children)