A cast of personas
Analysts, historians, narrators and editors — each with its own voice, method and discipline. Build your own or put the house roster to work.
A single general-purpose assistant is a compromise. The voice that should write a careful historical summary is not the voice that should draft ad copy, and neither should be the one reviewing the other's work. Personas let you stop compromising.
A persona is a role, not a prompt preset
Each persona carries its own instructions, its own model, and its own set of permitted tools. That last part is what makes them genuinely different from each other: a research persona can browse and query archives, an editor can read and critique, and a publishing persona can put something live. None of them can do the others' jobs by accident.
Voice and method, held steady
Because the instructions live with the persona rather than in whoever's message happened to start the conversation, the same persona produces recognisably the same work next week as it did today. That consistency is what makes a persona usable inside a scheduled routine — you are not re-explaining the job every run.
Personas that direct other personas
A driver persona can put others to work: it plans, delegates to a declared crew, gathers what comes back, critiques it, and iterates. Delegation is bounded — a driver may only call the personas on its roster, and there is a hard cap on how deep delegation can nest, so a chain cannot run away with itself.
Teams for the work that needs a conversation
Some problems are better argued than assigned. A team puts several personas in the same room to work a question between them, which suits analysis and review far better than a single pass by a single voice.
Start with the roster, then make it yours
The platform ships with a working cast, so routines can be built the day you arrive. Editing one, or writing your own, is a form — instructions, model, tools. Most operators end up with a house style spread across a handful of personas they trust.