Multi-model deliberation
Multiple AI models generate plans independently, then critique each other's work across correctness, security, and maintainability.
Three models plan. Then they argue. You get the best answer.
Huddle runs multi-model deliberation on complex tasks. Independent plans, structured critique, and consensus voting — so the winning approach survives scrutiny from every angle.
Decisions that survive scrutiny
Structured consensus
Condorcet, Schulze, or weighted-average voting produces a winning plan with confidence scores and minority reports.
Critique rounds
Up to three rounds of cross-model critique. Each model scores every other's plan on six dimensions.
Dissent capture
Close races include minority reports so you can see what the dissenting model found — and decide for yourself.
Execution with approval
The winning plan can be executed step-by-step with dry-run mode, approval gates, and full rollback support.
Works with your stack
Huddle integrates with Code Reviews, Agents, and IDE sessions. Use it anywhere a decision needs more than one perspective.
How it works
01
Describe the task
Explain what you need — a complex refactor, an architecture decision, or a multi-file change.
02
Models plan independently
Each model produces an approach, steps, risk assessment, and file-change plan without seeing the others.
03
Cross-model critique
Models review each other's plans and score them on correctness, completeness, maintainability, risk, elegance, and alignment.
04
Consensus and execution
Voting produces a winner. You review the plan, approve it, and Huddle executes — or you take the structured output and run it yourself.
Stop guessing. Start deliberating.
For the tasks where one model isn't enough, Huddle brings three to the table — and lets them fight it out.