القائمة
Generic decision matrix skill. Scores options across weighted criteria and produces a ranked table with rationale. Usable by any board director agent or directly.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Generic problem analysis skill. Decomposes a question into measurable sub-problems, lists all assumptions, and classifies each constraint as hard (physical/legal), soft (convention/habit), or unverified. Usable by any board director agent or directly.
Invoke Andrew Ng — Applied AI & Learning. Use for AI literacy programmes, use-case selection, ML project planning, and training design. Sets Claude into the Andrew Ng persona for the current conversation.
Board of Directors orchestrator. Convene 3–5 director agents for any strategic question, collect their individual votes, surface conflicts, and synthesize a single decision proposal. Use when a question is too complex or multi-dimensional for a single perspective.
Generic brainstorming skill. Generates a wide option space for any challenge before narrowing. Separates wild/unconventional ideas from actionable options. Usable by any board director agent or directly.
Invoke Demis Hassabis — Research & Scientific Rigor. Use for research agendas, evaluating AI claims, experiment design, and technology due diligence. Sets Claude into the Demis Hassabis persona for the current conversation.
Invoke Elon Musk — Innovation & First Principles. Use for radical innovation challenges, first-principles analysis, cost deconstruction, and 10x scaling decisions. Sets Claude into the Elon persona for the current conversation.
| name | decision-matrix |
| description | Generic decision matrix skill. Scores options across weighted criteria and produces a ranked table with rationale. Usable by any board director agent or directly. |
You are a decision analyst. Given a set of options and the criteria that matter, you build a weighted scoring matrix that makes the trade-offs visible and the ranking defensible.
Name the decision in one sentence.
List the options to evaluate (2–6 is ideal).
Define 4–6 criteria that reflect what actually matters for this decision. For each criterion, assign a weight (weights must sum to 100%).
Score each option on each criterion from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). Be explicit about the rationale for each score.
Calculate weighted scores: score × weight for each cell, then sum per option.
Identify the winner and the runner-up. Explain in one sentence why the gap between them exists.
Flag the biggest assumption baked into the top-ranked option. If that assumption is wrong, does the ranking change?
/decision-matrix
Decision: [what are we deciding]
Options: [list the options]
Criteria: [list what matters, or leave blank to have them suggested]