consult-zai by centminmod
Dual-AI code analysis pairing z.ai GLM 5.2 with Claude code-searcher — a lightweight two-model second opinion. Use for a quick z.ai-backed check on a code question.
Content & Writing
2.5K Stars
238 Forks
Updated Jul 13, 2026, 04:34 AM
Why Use This
This skill provides specialized capabilities for centminmod's codebase.
Use Cases
- Developing new features in the centminmod repository
- Refactoring existing code to follow centminmod standards
- Understanding and working with centminmod's codebase structure
Install Guide
2 steps- 1
Skip this step if Ananke is already installed.
- 2
Skill Snapshot
Auto scan of skill assets. Informational only.
Valid SKILL.md
Checks against SKILL.md specification
Source & Community
Repository my-claude-code-setup
Skill Version
master
Community
2.5K 238
Updated At Jul 13, 2026, 04:34 AM
Skill Stats
SKILL.md 313 Lines
Total Files 1
Total Size 14.7 KB
License MIT
---
name: consult-zai
description: Dual-AI code analysis pairing z.ai GLM 5.2 with Claude code-searcher — a lightweight two-model second opinion. Use for a quick z.ai-backed check on a code question.
---
# Dual-AI Consultation: z.ai GLM 5.2 vs Code-Searcher
You orchestrate consultation between z.ai's GLM 5.2 model and Claude's code-searcher to provide comprehensive analysis with comparison.
## When to Use This Skill
**High value queries:**
- Complex code analysis requiring multiple perspectives
- Debugging difficult issues
- Architecture/design questions
- Code review requests
- Finding specific implementations across a codebase
**Lower value (single AI may suffice):**
- Simple syntax questions
- Basic file lookups
- Straightforward documentation queries
## Workflow
When the user asks a code question:
### 1. Build Enhanced Prompt
**Problem-restate pre-flight (non-blocking).** Before building the prompt, emit ONE line
restating the code question you are about to dispatch (and, only if genuinely ambiguous, the
alternative reading), then proceed:
> *Reading this as: «one-line restatement» (alt: «other reading», if any) — proceeding to consult; interrupt now to correct the framing.*
Emit-and-proceed — do not ask-and-wait (the orchestrator can't reliably detect its own
misframing). One line, and it guards the whole dispatch against a wrong-framing run.
Wrap the user's question with structured output requirements:
````
[USER_QUESTION]
=== Analysis Guidelines ===
**Structure your response with:**
1. **Summary:** 2-3 sentence overview
2. **Key Findings:** bullet points of discoveries
3. **Evidence:** file paths with line numbers (format: `file:line` or `file:start-end`)
4. **Confidence:** High/Medium/Low with reasoning
5. **Limitations:** what couldn't be determined
**Line Number Requirements:**
- ALWAYS include specific line numbers when referencing code
- Use format: `path/to/file.ext:42` or `path/to/file.ext:42-58`
- For multiple references: list each on a SEPARATE line with its own file path
(avoid comma-separated multi-citation like `file.ts:45, 67, 98`)
- Include brief code snippets for key findings
**Examples of good citations:**
- "The authentication check at `src/auth/validate.ts:127-134`"
- "Configuration loaded from `config/settings.json:15`"
- "Error handling in `lib/errors.ts:45`, `lib/errors.ts:67-72`, and `lib/errors.ts:98`"
**Citations Index (required):** end your response with a fenced block, one line per
Key Finding (repeat each block entry's `file:line` inline in the finding as usual):
```citations
<finding #> — path/to/file.ext:LINE[-END]
```
````
**Severity / no-manufacture block — ORCHESTRATOR-GATED.** Append the block below to both
agents' prompts **identically** ONLY when the query is a defect hunt / code review (bug,
security audit, "what's wrong with…", "review this"). OMIT it for explanatory / "how does
X work" questions, where "found nothing" is not meaningful. The orchestrator — which knows
the query type — makes this include/omit decision once, BEFORE writing the prompt files;
do not leave it to each agent to self-classify. When included, append exactly these two
bullets (the text only — no leading marker):
- Tag each finding with a **Severity** — Critical (wrong/broken on expected inputs) · Warning (fails on unusual but valid inputs) · Info (noteworthy, not actionable). Severity is *impact*, orthogonal to the Confidence field (*certainty*).
- **Finding nothing is a valid, valuable result.** If the code is correct, say so plainly with one verifying note — do NOT manufacture issues to look thorough.
### 2. Invoke Both Analyses in Parallel
**Setup (run first).** `$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR` is not always exported into the Bash tool
shell, so resolve it with a `$PWD` fallback and ensure the tmp dir exists. Substitute the
resolved literal path for `$PROJECT_DIR`, and a freshly generated `RUN_ID`
(seconds-resolution + 4-char nonce, e.g. `run-2026-07-04-143052-a7f3`), into every command
below. The `RUN_ID` in temp filenames prevents collisions between two concurrent
invocations sharing `$PROJECT_DIR/tmp`.
```bash
PROJECT_DIR="${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR:-$PWD}"
# Validate BEFORE creating tmp — `mkdir -p` would otherwise make the check pass even
# for a bad path (it creates the dir, then `[ -d ]` always succeeds).
[ -d "$PROJECT_DIR" ] || { echo "ERROR: PROJECT_DIR '$PROJECT_DIR' is not a directory" >&2; exit 1; }
mkdir -p "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp"
# Pre-flight (fail fast, not after a 20-min hang). jq is a HARD dependency — the §2a
# parse recipe needs it — so abort now rather than warn-and-continue into opaque failures.
command -v jq >/dev/null 2>&1 || { echo "ERROR: 'jq' not found — required for output parsing; aborting" >&2; exit 1; }
# zai is a soft dependency (a shell function wrapping the claude CLI against z.ai's
# endpoint, loaded from ~/.zshrc or ~/.bashrc — hence the interactive-shell probes).
# Capture WHICH interactive shell resolves it; the dispatch below substitutes
# $INTERACTIVE_SHELL so a .bashrc-only setup on macOS still works. If neither shell
# resolves zai, skip its dispatch and label the run degraded (see §2 dispatch + §4).
ZAI_AVAIL=1; INTERACTIVE_SHELL=zsh
if zsh -i -c 'type zai' >/dev/null 2>&1; then ZAI_AVAIL=0; INTERACTIVE_SHELL=zsh
elif bash -i -c 'type zai' >/dev/null 2>&1; then ZAI_AVAIL=0; INTERACTIVE_SHELL=bash
else echo "WARNING: 'zai' not found in zsh or bash interactive shells — z.ai will be skipped"
fi
echo "ZAI_AVAIL=$ZAI_AVAIL" # MUST echo: shell vars don't persist across Bash tool calls
echo "INTERACTIVE_SHELL=$INTERACTIVE_SHELL" # substitute into the Step-2 dispatch below
# Sweep stale orphans (>60 min) from crashed prior runs (best-effort, age-based —
# can theoretically delete a live run's files if it paused >60 min; acceptable).
find "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp" -maxdepth 1 -name 'zai-prompt-*.txt' -mmin +60 -delete 2>/dev/null
find "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp" -maxdepth 1 -name 'zai-output-*.json' -mmin +60 -delete 2>/dev/null
find "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp" -maxdepth 1 -name 'zai-stderr-*.log' -mmin +60 -delete 2>/dev/null
# Resolve the timeout binary used to wrap the Step-2 z.ai dispatch so a hung CLI is
# bounded rather than running unbounded — the harness may auto-background the dispatch,
# letting it escape the Bash tool's own timeout. Homebrew coreutils installs GNU
# timeout as `gtimeout`; plain `timeout` exists only when the gnubin PATH is on. If
# neither exists, TIMEOUT_CMD stays empty → dispatch UNWRAPPED (best-effort;
# `brew install coreutils` restores the hard guard).
TIMEOUT_CMD=""
if command -v timeout >/dev/null 2>&1; then TIMEOUT_CMD="timeout"
elif command -v gtimeout >/dev/null 2>&1; then TIMEOUT_CMD="gtimeout"
fi
echo "TIMEOUT_CMD=$TIMEOUT_CMD" # substitute into the Step-2 dispatch (when empty: omit the wrap)
```
**Two-phase dispatch (required).** Tool calls in one message run concurrently, so emitting
the z.ai prompt-file Write and the z.ai dispatch together races the dispatch ahead of the
file existing (the `cat` pipes an empty/missing file). Use **two messages**: message 1
writes the z.ai prompt file (Step 1 below); message 2 issues the z.ai dispatch (Step 2)
and the Code-Searcher Agent call in parallel.
**Gen-dispatch timeout watchdog (`GEN_TIMEOUT=1200`).** The z.ai dispatch is wrapped in
`$TIMEOUT_CMD -k 10 1200` (resolved in Setup) — SIGTERM at 1200s (20 min), SIGKILL 10s
later (`-k 10`, reaps orphaned Node/MCP children). This bounds a hung z.ai CLI that could
otherwise run unbounded (the harness may auto-background the dispatch, so the Bash tool's
own timeout is **not** a reliable cap). **When `TIMEOUT_CMD` is empty**: omit the
`$TIMEOUT_CMD -k 10 1200` prefix and dispatch unwrapped — set the Bash tool's own
`timeout` parameter to `1300000` ms as a best-effort cap, and `brew install coreutils` to
restore the hard guard. **On a timed-out dispatch** (exit **124** = SIGTERM, **137** =
SIGKILL): the output file is empty/truncated, so the §2a `[ -z … ]` parse guard drops the
agent — treat z.ai as failed per §4 (present Code-Searcher's response and note the
timeout; do NOT retry). Code-Searcher (Agent tool) is not wrapped — it bounds itself.
- **For z.ai GLM 5.2:**
**Step 1:** Write the enhanced prompt to a temp file using the Write tool:
```
Write to $PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-prompt-RUN_ID.txt with the ENHANCED_PROMPT content
```
**Step 2:** Execute z.ai (skip if Setup echoed `ZAI_AVAIL=1` — no working `zai`;
present only the Code-Searcher response and **label the report a degraded single-AI
run**: no cross-comparison, and note a direct Read or lighter path would have been
cheaper). Pipe the prompt via stdin and capture output/stderr to files
(`$INTERACTIVE_SHELL` = the `zsh`|`bash` literal resolved in Setup):
```bash
cat "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-prompt-RUN_ID.txt" | \
$TIMEOUT_CMD -k 10 1200 $INTERACTIVE_SHELL -i -c "zai --bare --print --output-format json --model 'glm-5.2[1m]' --allowedTools 'Read,Grep,Glob' --add-dir '$PROJECT_DIR'" \
> "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-output-RUN_ID.json" \
2> "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-stderr-RUN_ID.log"
```
Why this exact form (each piece prevents a failure seen in practice):
- **`--bare` is required** — `zai` exports `ANTHROPIC_AUTH_TOKEN`; without `--bare` the
parent session's OAuth token shadows it → 401 against the z.ai endpoint.
- **`--model 'glm-5.2[1m]'` is required** — guarantees GLM 5.2 regardless of which tier
default resolution would pick (guards against the `glm-5-turbo` subagent default).
- **Read-only is hard-enforced** via `--allowedTools 'Read,Grep,Glob'` — consultation is
analysis, not modification; never relax these flags.
- **stdin pipe** (`cat … | …`) instead of `-p "$(cat …)"` avoids shell-quoting breakage
and ARG_MAX limits on large prompts.
- **`--add-dir '$PROJECT_DIR'`** — outer-shell single-quote expansion of the absolute
path gives z.ai project context; never pass the dir via an inner-shell positional
(skill argument substitution rewrites positional tokens).
- stderr captured separately; on a 401/auth failure it carries the diagnostic.
- **For Code-Searcher:** Use Agent tool with `subagent_type: "code-searcher"` with the same enhanced prompt (plus the orchestrator-gated Severity block above on defect-hunt runs)
This parallel execution significantly improves response time.
### 2a. Parse z.ai JSON Output (jq Recipe)
`zai --print --output-format json` emits a JSON array (possibly prefixed with ANSI/OSC
terminal escapes — iTerm2 shell-integration codes); rarely the CLI returns a bare object
instead of an array. Canonical slice, then a bare-object fallback:
```bash
ZAI_FILE="$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-output-RUN_ID.json"
response=$(jq -Rrs '
(try (match("\\[\\s*\\{[\\s\\S]*\\]").string) catch empty)
| fromjson?
| .[]
| select(.type=="result")
| .result // empty
' "$ZAI_FILE")
# Fallback (rare — primary slice empty on a NON-empty file): salvage ONLY a genuine
# result/message/assistant shape.
if [ -z "$response" ] && [ -s "$ZAI_FILE" ]; then
response=$(jq -Rrs '
(try (match("\\{[\\s\\S]*\\}").string) catch empty)
| fromjson?
| if .type=="result" then (.result // empty)
elif .type=="message" then ((.content[]? | select(.type=="text") | .text) // empty)
elif .type=="assistant" then ((.message.content[]? | select(.type=="text") | .text) // empty)
else empty end
' "$ZAI_FILE")
fi
[ -z "$response" ] && echo "ERROR: z.ai produced no result event — check the stderr log (and the --bare / --model 'glm-5.2[1m]' flags)" >&2
printf '%s\n' "$response"
```
### 3. Cleanup Temp Files
After processing the z.ai response, clean up the temp files — on a FAILURE, do this only
AFTER §4 has quoted the stderr tail (cleanup deletes the diagnostic):
```bash
rm -f "$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-prompt-RUN_ID.txt" \
"$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-output-RUN_ID.json" \
"$PROJECT_DIR/tmp/zai-stderr-RUN_ID.log"
```
This prevents stale prompts from accumulating and avoids potential confusion in future runs.
### 4. Handle Errors
- If one agent fails or times out, still present the successful agent's response
- Note the failure in the comparison: "Agent X failed to respond: [error message]"
- On a z.ai failure, quote the tail of `zai-stderr-RUN_ID.log` (auth/endpoint diagnostics
live there) before cleanup
- Provide analysis based on the available response; with only one agent, label the report
a degraded single-AI run (no cross-comparison)
### 5. Create Comparison Analysis
Use this exact format:
---
## z.ai (GLM 5.2) Response
[Raw output from zai-cli agent]
---
## Code-Searcher (Claude) Response
[Raw output from code-searcher agent]
---
## Comparison Table
(MANDATORY — always render this table on a multi-agent run; it is the at-a-glance visual diff readers rely on, so never skip it. Omit only in a degraded single-AI run, where there is nothing to compare.)
| Aspect | z.ai (GLM 5.2) | Code-Searcher (Claude) |
|--------|----------------|------------------------|
| File paths | [Specific/Generic/None] | [Specific/Generic/None] |
| Line numbers | [Provided/Missing] | [Provided/Missing] |
| Code snippets | [Yes/No + details] | [Yes/No + details] |
| Unique findings | [List any] | [List any] |
| Accuracy | [Note discrepancies] | [Note discrepancies] |
| Strengths | [Summary] | [Summary] |
## Agreement Level
- **High Agreement:** Both AIs reached similar conclusions - Higher confidence in findings
- **Partial Agreement:** Some overlap with unique findings - Investigate differences
- **Disagreement:** Contradicting findings - Manual verification recommended
[State which level applies and explain]
## Findings by Corroboration
Bucket each *distinct* finding by how many agents independently reached it:
- **Corroborated** — both agents report it. Highest trust *as a consensus signal* — this
dual has no citation-verification stage, so it is agreement, not verified correctness.
- **Solo** — reported by one agent only. Plausible but unconfirmed.
- **Disputed** — the agents contradict on the point. Flag for manual verification.
(Cluster findings across agents by their claim + `file:line` — the Citations Index blocks
make this pairing mechanical. On a defect-hunt run, tag each listed finding with its
agent-assigned Severity — Critical/Warning/Info.)
## Key Differences
- **z.ai GLM 5.2:** [unique findings, strengths, approach]
- **Code-Searcher:** [unique findings, strengths, approach]
## Synthesized Summary
[Combine the best insights from both sources into unified analysis. Prioritize findings that are:
1. Corroborated by both agents
2. Supported by specific file:line citations
3. Include verifiable code snippets]
## Recommendation
[Which source was more helpful for this specific query and why. Consider:
- Accuracy of file paths and line numbers
- Quality of code snippets provided
- Completeness of analysis
- Unique insights offered]
Name Size