Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Choose optimal external AI models for code analysis, bug investigation, and architectural decisions. Use when consulting multiple LLMs via claudish, comparing model perspectives, or investigating complex Go/LSP/transpiler issues. Provides empirically validated model rankings (91/100 for MiniMax M2, 83/100 for Grok Code Fast) and proven consultation strategies based on real-world testing.
.claude/skills/microck-external-model-selection/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 45% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 114% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 127% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 116% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 346% | 0% |
Purpose: Select the best external AI models for your specific task based on empirical performance data from production bug investigations.
When Claude invokes this Skill: When you need to consult external models, choose between different LLMs, or want diverse perspectives on architectural decisions, code bugs, or design choices.
1. MiniMax M2 (minimax/minimax-m2)
2. Grok Code Fast (x-ai/grok-code-fast-1)
3. GPT-5.1 Codex (openai/gpt-5.1-codex)
4. Sherlock Think Alpha (openrouter/sherlock-think-alpha) 🎁 FREE
5. Gemini 3 Pro Preview (google/gemini-3-pro-preview) ⭐ NEW
6. Gemini 2.5 Flash (google/gemini-2.5-flash)
7. GLM-4.6 (z-ai/glm-4.6)
Qwen3 Coder (qwen/qwen3-coder-30b-a3b-instruct)
Models: minimax/minimax-m2 + x-ai/grok-code-fast-1
bash# Launch 2 models in parallel (single message, multiple Task calls) Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → MiniMax M2 Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Grok Code Fast
Time: ~4 minutes total Success Rate: 95%+ Cost: $$ (moderate)
Use for:
Benefits:
Models: minimax/minimax-m2 + openai/gpt-5.1-codex + x-ai/grok-code-fast-1
bash# Launch 3 models in parallel Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → MiniMax M2 Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → GPT-5.1 Codex Task 3: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Grok Code Fast
Time: ~5 minutes total Success Rate: 99%+ Cost: $$$ (high but justified)
Use for:
Benefits:
Models: minimax/minimax-m2 + google/gemini-2.5-flash + x-ai/grok-code-fast-1
bash# Launch 3 models in parallel Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → MiniMax M2 Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Gemini 2.5 Flash Task 3: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Grok Code Fast
Time: ~6 minutes total Success Rate: 90%+ Cost: $$ (moderate)
Use for:
Benefits:
Models: openrouter/sherlock-think-alpha + google/gemini-3-pro-preview
bash# Launch 2 models in parallel Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Sherlock Think Alpha Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Gemini 3 Pro Preview
Time: ~5 minutes total Success Rate: TBD (new strategy) Cost: $$$ (one free, one paid = moderate overall)
Use for:
Benefits:
Prompt Strategy:
markdownAnalyze the entire Dingo codebase focusing on [specific aspect]. Context provided: - All files in pkg/ (50+ files) - All tests in tests/ (60+ files) - Documentation in ai-docs/ - Total: ~200k lines of code Your task: [specific analysis goal]
Models: openrouter/sherlock-think-alpha + x-ai/grok-code-fast-1
bash# Launch 2 models in parallel Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Sherlock Think Alpha (FREE!) Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Grok Code Fast
Time: ~5 minutes total Success Rate: 85%+ Cost: $$ (Sherlock is FREE, only pay for Grok!)
Use for:
Benefits:
START: Need external model consultation
↓
[What type of task?]
↓
├─ Bug Investigation (90% of cases)
│ → Strategy 1: MiniMax M2 + Grok Code Fast
│ → Time: 4 min | Cost: $$ | Success: 95%+
│
├─ Critical Bug / Architectural Decision
│ → Strategy 2: MiniMax M2 + GPT-5.1 + Grok
│ → Time: 5 min | Cost: $$$ | Success: 99%+
│
├─ Ambiguous / Multi-faceted Problem
│ → Strategy 3: MiniMax M2 + Gemini + Grok
│ → Time: 6 min | Cost: $$ | Success: 90%+
│
└─ Cost-Sensitive / Exploratory
→ Strategy 4: Gemini + Grok
→ Time: 6 min | Cost: $ | Success: 85%+CRITICAL: External models take 5-10 minutes. Default 2-minute timeout WILL fail.
python# When delegating to agents in PROXY MODE: Task tool → golang-architect: **CRITICAL - Timeout Configuration**: When executing claudish via Bash tool, ALWAYS use:
Bash( command='cat prompt.md | claudish --model model-id] > output.md 2>&1', timeout=600000, # 10 minutes (REQUIRED!) description='External consultation via model-name]' )
**Why**: Qwen3 Coder failed due to 2-minute timeout. 10 minutes prevents this.
---
### 2. Launch Models in Parallel (Single Message)
**CORRECT** (6-8x speedup):Task 1: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Model A Task 2: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Model B Task 3: golang-architect (PROXY MODE) → Model C
**WRONG** (sequential, slow):Message 1: Task → Model A (wait...) Message 2: Task → Model B (wait...) Message 3: Task → Model C (wait...)
---
### 3. Agent Return Format (Keep Brief!)
Agents in PROXY MODE MUST return MAX 3 lines:
Model-name] analysis complete Root cause: one-line summary] Full analysis: file-path]
**DO NOT** return full analysis in agent response (causes context bloat).
---
### 4. File-Based Communication
**Input**: Write investigation prompt to fileai-docs/sessions/timestamp]/input/investigation-prompt.md
**Output**: Agents write full analysis to filesai-docs/sessions/timestamp]/output/model-name]-analysis.md
**Main chat**: Reads ONLY summaries, not full files
---
## Evidence: What Made Top Models Win
Based on LSP Source Mapping Bug Investigation (Session 20251118-223538):
### ✅ Success Patterns
**MiniMax M2** (91/100):
- Identified exact bug: `qPos` calculation produces column 15 instead of 27
- Proposed simplest fix: Change `strings.Index()` to `strings.LastIndex()`
- Completed in 3 minutes
- **Key insight**: "The bug is entirely in source map generation"
**Grok Code Fast** (83/100):
- Provided step-by-step execution trace
- Identified tab vs spaces edge case
- Proposed validation strategy with debug logging
- **Key insight**: "Generated_column values don't match actual positions due to prefix length"
**GPT-5.1 Codex** (80/100):
- Identified architectural limitation (coarse-grained mappings)
- Proposed long-term solution: granular mapping segments
- Excellent testing strategy
- **Key insight**: "Single coarse-grained mapping per error propagation"
### ❌ Failure Patterns
**Gemini 2.5 Flash** (73/100):
- Went too deep into fallback logic (not the root cause)
- Explored 10+ hypotheses
- Missed the simple bug (qPos calculation)
- **Issue**: Too thorough, lost focus on simplest explanation
**GLM-4.6** (70/100):
- Focused on MapToOriginal algorithm (which was correct)
- Proposed complex enhancements (priority system, debug logging)
- Overengineered the solution
- **Issue**: Added complexity when simple data fix was needed
**Sherlock Think** (65/100):
- Focused on 0-based vs 1-based indexing (secondary issue)
- Proposed normalization (helpful but not main fix)
- Expensive at $$$ for limited value
- **Issue**: Fixed symptoms, not root cause
**Qwen3 Coder** (0/100):
- Timed out after 8+ minutes
- No output produced
- Reliability issues
- **Issue**: Complete failure, avoid entirely
---
## Performance Benchmarks (Empirical Data)
**Test**: LSP Source Mapping Bug (diagnostic underlining wrong code)
**Methodology**: 8 models tested in parallel on real production bug
| Model | Time | Accuracy | Solution | Cost-Value |
|-------|------|----------|----------|------------|
| MiniMax M2 | 3 min | ✅ Exact | Simple fix | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Grok Code Fast | 4 min | ✅ Correct | Good validation | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| GPT-5.1 Codex | 5 min | ⚠️ Partial | Complex design | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | 6 min | ⚠️ Missed | Overanalyzed | ⭐⭐⭐ |
| GLM-4.6 | 7 min | ❌ Wrong | Overengineered | ⭐⭐ |
| Sherlock Think | 5 min | ❌ Secondary | Wrong cause | ⭐⭐ |
| Qwen3 Coder | 8+ min | ❌ Failed | Timeout | ⚠️ |
**Key Finding**: Faster models (3-5 min) delivered better results than slower ones (6-8 min).
**Correlation**: Speed ↔ Simplicity (faster models prioritize simple explanations first)
---
## When to Use Each Model
### Use MiniMax M2 when:
- ✅ Need fast, accurate diagnosis (3 minutes)
- ✅ Want simplest solution (avoid overengineering)
- ✅ Production bug investigation
- ✅ Most everyday tasks (90% of use cases)
### Use Grok Code Fast when:
- ✅ Need detailed debugging trace
- ✅ Want validation strategy
- ✅ Designing test coverage
- ✅ Understanding execution flow
### Use GPT-5.1 Codex when:
- ✅ Planning major architectural changes
- ✅ Need long-term refactoring strategy
- ✅ Want comprehensive testing approach
- ✅ High-level design decisions
### Use Gemini 2.5 Flash when:
- ✅ Problem is genuinely ambiguous
- ✅ Need exhaustive hypothesis exploration
- ✅ Budget is constrained (low cost)
- ✅ Multiple potential root causes
### Avoid using when:
- ❌ Problem is simple/obvious (just fix it)
- ❌ Sonnet 4.5 internal can answer (use internal first)
- ❌ Already-solved problem (check docs first)
- ❌ Time-critical (Qwen3 unreliable)
---
## Example: Invoking External Models
### Step 1: Create Session
SESSION=$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S) mkdir -p ai-docs/sessions/$SESSION/{input,output}
### Step 2: Write Investigation Prompt
echo "Problem: LSP diagnostic underlining wrong code..." > \ ai-docs/sessions/$SESSION/input/investigation-prompt.md
### Step 3: Choose Strategy
Based on decision tree:
- Bug investigation → Strategy 1 (MiniMax M2 + Grok)
### Step 4: Launch Agents in Parallel
**Single message with 2 Task calls**:
Task 1 → golang-architect (PROXY MODE):
You are operating in PROXY MODE to investigate bug using MiniMax M2.
INPUT FILES:
YOUR TASK (PROXY MODE):
CRITICAL - Timeout: Bash(timeout=600000) # 10 minutes!
OUTPUT FILES:
RETURN (MAX 3 lines): MiniMax M2 analysis complete Root cause: one-line] Full analysis: file-path]
Task 2 → golang-architect (PROXY MODE):
Same structure for Grok Code Fast]
### Step 5: Consolidate
After receiving both summaries:
1. Review 1-line summaries from each model
2. Identify consensus vs disagreements
3. Optionally read full analyses if needed
4. Decide on action based on recommendations
---
## Supporting Files
- **[BENCHMARKS.md](BENCHMARKS.md)** - Detailed performance metrics and test methodology
- **[STRATEGIES.md](STRATEGIES.md)** - Deep dive into each consultation strategy with examples
---
## Validation & Maintenance
**Last Validated**: 2025-11-18 (Session 20251118-223538)
**Next Review**: 2025-05 (6 months)
**Test Task**: LSP Source Mapping Bug
**Re-validation Schedule**:
- Every 3-6 months
- After new models become available
- When model performance changes significantly
**Track**:
- Model availability/reliability
- Speed improvements
- Accuracy changes
- Cost fluctuations
---
## Summary: Quick Decision Guide
**Most common use case (90%)**:
→ Use Strategy 1: MiniMax M2 + Grok Code Fast
→ Time: 4 min | Cost: $$ | Success: 95%+
**Critical issues**:
→ Use Strategy 2: MiniMax M2 + GPT-5.1 + Grok
→ Time: 5 min | Cost: $$$ | Success: 99%+
**Ambiguous problems**:
→ Use Strategy 3: MiniMax M2 + Gemini + Grok
→ Time: 6 min | Cost: $$ | Success: 90%+
**Cost-sensitive**:
→ Use Strategy 4: Gemini + Grok
→ Time: 6 min | Cost: $ | Success: 85%+
**Remember**:
- ⏱️ Always use 10-minute timeout
- 🚀 Launch models in parallel (single message)
- 📝 Communication via files (not inline)
- 🎯 Brief summaries only (MAX 3 lines)
---
**Full Reports**:
- Comprehensive comparison: `ai-docs/sessions/20251118-223538/01-planning/comprehensive-model-comparison.md`
- Model ranking analysis: `ai-docs/sessions/20251118-223538/01-planning/model-ranking-analysis.md`| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 19,794 | 12,213 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,493 | 5,933 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 16,647 | 8,161 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,936 | 6,044 | +106% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 23,967 | 9,309 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,803 | 6,986 | +45% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 21,789 | 13,959 | -36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,522 | 7,545 | +114% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 16,371 | 8,273 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,795 | 6,331 | +127% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 16,585 | 6,406 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,777 | 6,012 | +116% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 13,023 | 4,502 | -65% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,900 | 5,559 | +193% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 13,901 | 3,318 | -76% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,311 | 5,444 | +136% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 17,469 | 10,329 | -41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,029 | 6,945 | +129% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 11,431 | 2,275 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,603 | 5,256 | +228% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 31,638 | 3,918 | -88% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,251 | 5,583 | +346% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 6,194 | 3,172 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,036 | 5,441 | +425% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 9,694 | 4,681 | -52% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,494 | 5,669 | +279% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 14,200 | 5,694 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,358 | 5,886 | +150% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 15,660 | 6,040 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,349 | 5,881 | +150% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 10,866 | 4,340 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,873 | 5,702 | +204% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 7,352 | 2,839 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,170 | 5,444 | +365% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 9,232 | 4,878 | -47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,300 | 5,760 | +343% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 10,648 | 4,370 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,471 | 5,588 | +280% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 33,599 | 17,161 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,832 | 7,852 | +177% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 11,207 | 9,057 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,120 | 6,614 | +212% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 9,550 | 8,268 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,048 | 6,610 | +223% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 20 counted toward the lift figure. The other 2 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +59 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 20 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.