by Synenergy · cases
“Your documents” is for large context with quotes and a visible cost — mainstream recursive reading of files you supply. The panel is for a plural second opinion. Pick by the job.
Each case is one mode: the payoff, a concrete situation, and an anti-case. Broader is not always more accurate. A quote-check proves the quote is in your files — not that the conclusion is right.
Payoff: work a large file set without dumping it into one expensive chat — quotes, a quote-check, and a clear cost. Cheap helpers prep; judgment stays controlled.
Situation: specs, notes, and logs that will not fit one prompt; you need “what do these files actually say about X” with quotes.
Best for: big context, contradictions, cost-visible runs.
Not for: second-opinion panels, one short file you can read yourself, or world facts with no files. A passed quote-check means the quote is in your files — not that the conclusion is true worldwide.
Payoff: see disagreement before you commit — who hallucinates, who hedges.
Situation: you have an open design or strategy question and want side-by-side answers without a judge collapsing them yet.
Best for: quick sanity check — do the models agree?
Not for: a single fused answer (use Deliberate).
Payoff: one distilled answer plus visible contradictions — everyday second opinion.
Situation: you need a usable write-up after the panel, not a raw matrix of voices.
Best for: daily work — one reliable answer instead of several raw ones.
Not for: unverified world facts; not a substitute for reading your own files (use Your documents).
Payoff: an independent accept / reject / abstain gate on a finished candidate — no fused essay.
Situation: a PR, release note, or decision text is ready; you want a quality signal before merge.
Best for: validating a finished decision, text, or code before release.
Not for: replacing tests or human review; not for open ideation.
Payoff: a fan of options, not one opinion — blind generation then recombination.
Situation: naming, positioning, or product directions where you need divergence first.
Best for: finding new ideas when you need a fan of options.
Not for: checking contradictions across a set of files (use Your documents).
Payoff: cross-school coverage when one lineage’s blind spots are expensive.
Situation: a high-value open question where shared training priors could hide the same miss.
Best for: decisions where shared blind spots are dangerous.
Not for: cheap chat; not a statistical independence guarantee.
Payoff: a structured panel session for calls that are expensive to reverse.
Situation: architecture, strategy, or naming at a fork you will live with for months.
Best for: architecture, strategy, naming — hard reversals.
Not for: routine edits or single-file questions.
Payoff: ranked evidence for which solo model or panel recipe fits a class of tasks — before you ship that choice into Hermes, Cursor, or another agent.
Situation: you’re wiring an agent and don’t want
to guess the default model or route from a blog post.
Free Lab helpers scout the catalog; a tiny paid experiment ranks
real candidate routes (approve spend).
Best for: operators and agent builders setting lasting defaults.
Not for: one-shot user questions; live A/B on every chat; UMC accept/reject of a finished artifact (use Vote). Runtime answers still use compare, deliberate, vote, or Your documents.
Connect once. Prefer “Your documents” when the pile will not fit one prompt (quotes + cost control). Use the panel for a plural second opinion. Use Route Lab when choosing a lasting default for a task class — not for one-shot chats. After an update, reconnect once so new tools appear. A normal single-model chat link alone does not run “Your documents” or Lab.