| name | decide-between-options |
| description | Compare competing approaches, tools, architectures, designs, vendors, workflows, or plans and recommend one using explicit criteria, evidence, tradeoffs, assumptions, and reversal conditions. Trigger when the user needs a decision rather than a neutral list of options. |
Decide Between Options
Outcome
Turn competing options into a concrete recommendation that the user can accept, reject, or revise.
Workflow
- State the decision, viable options, hard constraints, time horizon, and costly
or irreversible consequences.
- Inspect available files, prior context, and current authoritative sources when
the decision depends on them. Ask only for a missing fact that would
materially change the recommendation; otherwise state a reasonable
assumption and proceed.
- Select 3-6 decision criteria that distinguish the options. Weight them only
when weighting changes the result.
- Compare options against the same criteria. Separate observed evidence from
inference and unknowns.
- Recommend one option, name its main cost, and state the evidence or condition
that would reverse the choice.
Output
Lead with the recommendation. Use this structure when it improves scanability:
Recommendation: <option>
Why: <concise rationale>
Tradeoffs:
- <option>: <strengths, weaknesses, risks>
Assumptions:
- <assumption>
What would change my mind:
- <condition or evidence>
For a simple decision, omit empty sections and answer in a compact paragraph.
Completion Check
- The recommendation follows from the stated criteria rather than preference or
option order.
- Material uncertainty, switching costs, and downside risk are visible.
- The user can tell both what to choose now and what new evidence would change
the decision.
