feat(council): add D/P (Deterministic/Probabilistic) dual-group mode

- New 'mode' parameter: personality (default) or dp
- D group: grounded, feasibility-first (Freethinker + Arbiter)
- P group: exploratory, reframing-first (Freethinker + Arbiter)
- Meta-Arbiter merges best ideas from both groups
- Full prompt templates for ideation, assessment, bridge, and merge
- Orchestration docs for single-round and multi-round D/P flows
- Inspired by Flynn's dual-council architecture, adapted for OpenClaw subagents

skills/council/SKILL.md

@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ final verdict with collapsed advisor perspectives.
 
 | Parameter | Default | Description |
 |-----------|---------|-------------|
+| mode      | personality | `personality` (3 advisors) or `dp` (D/P dual-group) |
 | flow      | parallel | `parallel`, `sequential`, or `debate` |
 | rounds    | 1       | Number of deliberation rounds (1-5). Round 1 = opening positions. Round 2+ = rebuttals where advisors see and respond to each other. |
 | tier      | light   | Model tier: `light`, `medium`, or `heavy` (see Model Selection) |
@@ -23,7 +24,51 @@ final verdict with collapsed advisor perspectives.
 - `flow=sequential, rounds=1` — each advisor sees prior outputs, then referee
 - `flow=debate, rounds=3` — parallel opening + cross-advisor rebuttals + referee synthesis
 
-## Advisor Roster (default)
+## Modes
+
+### Personality Mode (default)
+
+Three advisors with distinct personality lenses. Best for opinion, strategy, and brainstorming topics.
+
+### D/P Mode (Deterministic/Probabilistic)
+
+Two groups of advisors with opposing cognitive styles, inspired by Flynn's dual-council architecture. Best for complex problem-solving, technical design, and situations where you want both grounded AND creative solutions.
+
+- **Group D (Deterministic)**: Grounded, feasibility-first, risk-averse. Optimizes for "boring-but-true."
+- **Group P (Probabilistic)**: Exploratory, reframing-first, risk-tolerant. Optimizes for "non-obvious leverage."
+
+Each group has a **Freethinker** (generates ideas) and an **Arbiter** (evaluates/ranks them). The **Referee** (Meta-Arbiter) merges the best from both groups.
+
+#### D/P Subagent Roster
+
+| Role | Group | Lens | Stance |
+|------|-------|------|--------|
+| D-Freethinker | Deterministic | Proven approaches, minimal assumptions | "What's the most reliable path?" |
+| D-Arbiter | Deterministic | Feasibility scoring, risk assessment | "Does this hold up under scrutiny?" |
+| P-Freethinker | Probabilistic | Reframing, lateral thinking | "What if the question is wrong?" |
+| P-Arbiter | Probabilistic | Novelty scoring, upside potential | "Is this different enough to matter?" |
+| Meta-Arbiter | — | Cross-group synthesis | "What survives both worldviews?" |
+
+#### D/P Flow (mode=dp)
+
+Single-round (rounds=1):
+1. Spawn D-Freethinker and P-Freethinker in parallel — each generates ideas.
+2. Spawn D-Arbiter and P-Arbiter in parallel — each evaluates their group's ideas, produces shortlist.
+3. Spawn Meta-Arbiter with both group shortlists — selects primary/secondary ideas, identifies merges.
+
+Multi-round (rounds=N):
+1. **Round 1**: Parallel ideation (both freethinkers) → parallel assessment (both arbiters) → bridge packets.
+2. **Round 2..N**: Each group receives the other's bridge packet. Freethinkers revise/extend. Arbiters re-evaluate.
+3. **Final**: Meta-Arbiter receives final shortlists from both groups.
+
+Total subagent calls: 5 (single-round) or 4N+1 (multi-round).
+
+#### When to use D/P vs Personality
+
+- **Personality** (`mode=personality`): "Should we do X?" — opinion/judgment calls, strategy debates
+- **D/P** (`mode=dp`): "How should we solve X?" — problem-solving, technical design, generating concrete approaches
+
+## Personality Mode — Advisor Roster
 
 | Role         | Lens                            | System stance                    |
 |--------------|---------------------------------|----------------------------------|
@@ -138,3 +183,7 @@ Default roster and prompt templates live in `references/prompts.md`.
 - Consider unifying debate and parallel flows (mechanically identical, differ only in prompt tone)
 - Explore whether 2 rounds is sufficient for most topics (vs 3)
 - Test with different model tiers for advisors vs referee
+- Test D/P mode end-to-end — validate prompt templates produce useful structured output
+- Tune D/P ideas_per_round and scoring thresholds
+- Consider hybrid mode: D/P groups for ideation then personality advisors for evaluation
+- Bridge packet design: what info to exchange between groups in multi-round D/P