awtlytrn-also-what-s-the-limit-you-think-right-now

name	awtlytrn - Also What's The Limit You Think Right Now
description	Estimate current practical limits for scope, throughput, and quality across multiple dimensions, then recommend a safe operating boundary that accounts for planning fallacy.
output	{"format":"prose"}

AWTLYTRN - Also What's The Limit You Think Right Now

Input: $ARGUMENTS

---

Core Principles

1. Limits are contextual, not fixed. The same person can process 5 skills in one session and 20 in another depending on complexity, energy, familiarity, and tooling. Estimate limits for THIS context, not in general.

2. People overestimate consistently. The planning fallacy is universal. Whatever the estimated limit is, apply a discount. The question isn't "what do you think the limit is?" but "what is the limit ACTUALLY, given what you think it is?"

3. Three dimensions compete. Scope (how much), quality (how good), and throughput (how fast) form a triangle. You can optimize two at the expense of the third. The skill must make this tradeoff explicit.

4. Safe boundary ≠ maximum. The safe operating boundary is below the theoretical maximum. It accounts for interruptions, errors, rework, and energy depletion. Operating at the theoretical max guarantees failure.

5. Limits change. Yesterday's limit isn't today's. Learning, tooling, and fatigue all shift the boundary. The estimate is a snapshot, not a permanent assessment.

---

Phase 1: Context Assessment

[L1] SUBJECT: [what is being limited — a project, a session, a sprint, a task]
[L2] DIMENSION_PRIMARY: [scope | throughput | quality — which matters most?]
[L3] RESOURCES: [time available, energy level, tool availability, skill level]
[L4] COMPLEXITY: [how complex is each unit of work?]
[L5] PRIOR_EXPERIENCE: [has the user done similar work? At what scale?]

---

Phase 2: Limit Estimation

Estimate limits across three dimensions:

[L6] SCOPE ESTIMATE:
  OPTIMISTIC: [maximum items/features/tasks if everything goes perfectly]
  REALISTIC: [what's achievable with normal interruptions and errors]
  PESSIMISTIC: [what's achievable if things go worse than expected]
  DISCOUNT: [optimistic × 0.6-0.8 = realistic — what discount factor?]

[L7] THROUGHPUT ESTIMATE:
  OPTIMISTIC: [items per hour/day if perfectly focused]
  REALISTIC: [items per hour/day with breaks, context switches, rework]
  PESSIMISTIC: [items per hour/day if blockers arise]
  DISCOUNT: [optimistic × factor = realistic]

[L8] QUALITY ESTIMATE:
  AT_CURRENT_SCOPE: [quality level achievable at current scope plan]
  AT_REDUCED_SCOPE: [quality level if scope is cut 30%]
  AT_EXPANDED_SCOPE: [quality level if scope is increased 30%]

Planning Fallacy Corrections

Bias	Correction
"I'll be focused the whole time"	Assume 60-70% effective focus time
"Each item takes about X minutes"	Multiply by 1.5 for items you've done before, 2-3x for novel items
"I won't need to redo anything"	Assume 15-20% rework rate
"I know how to do this"	Prior experience at smaller scale doesn't predict limits at larger scale
"I can just push through"	Quality degrades predictably with fatigue. Session 1 ≠ session 5

---

Phase 3: Tradeoff Analysis

[L9] TRADEOFF TRIANGLE:
  CURRENT PLAN: [scope level] scope × [quality level] quality × [speed level] speed

  IF PRIORITIZE SCOPE: [more items, but quality drops to X or speed drops to Y]
  IF PRIORITIZE QUALITY: [fewer items, but each is higher quality]
  IF PRIORITIZE SPEED: [faster delivery, but scope or quality must give]

[L10] RECOMMENDED PRIORITY: [which dimension to optimize for, given context]
[L11] SACRIFICE: [which dimension takes the hit, and how much]

---

Phase 4: Safe Operating Boundary

[L12] SAFE BOUNDARY:
  SCOPE: [N items — below the realistic estimate by a margin]
  THROUGHPUT: [N items per time unit — sustainable pace]
  QUALITY: [level — achievable at this scope and throughput]

  MARGIN: [how much buffer between safe and maximum]
  MARGIN_RATIONALE: [why this margin — based on complexity, experience, stakes]

[L13] DANGER ZONE:
  SCOPE_DANGER: [above N items, quality will degrade noticeably]
  THROUGHPUT_DANGER: [above N items/hour, errors will increase]
  QUALITY_DANGER: [below this level, output becomes unreliable]

[L14] CHECKPOINTS:
  AT_25%: [check these indicators to see if on track]
  AT_50%: [check these indicators]
  AT_75%: [if behind here, trigger scope reduction]

---

Phase 5: Output

LIMIT ASSESSMENT
================

SUBJECT: [what]
CONTEXT: [resources, complexity, experience]

ESTIMATES:
  SCOPE: [optimistic → realistic → pessimistic]
  THROUGHPUT: [optimistic → realistic → pessimistic]
  QUALITY: [at current scope → at reduced → at expanded]

TRADEOFF: Prioritize [dimension] — sacrifice [dimension]

SAFE OPERATING BOUNDARY:
  SCOPE: [N items]
  THROUGHPUT: [N per time unit]
  QUALITY: [level]
  MARGIN: [X% below maximum]

DANGER ZONES:
  [what triggers quality/throughput degradation]

CHECKPOINTS:
  [when to check and what to look for]

READY FOR:
- /de [task list] — to extract dependencies within the safe scope
- /to [task list] — to sequence work within throughput limits
- /iagca — if scope needs aggressive compression

---

Failure Modes

Failure	Signal	Fix
No discount applied	Realistic estimate equals optimistic	Apply planning fallacy corrections — always discount
Single dimension	Only scope estimated, no quality/throughput	All three dimensions must be estimated
No safe boundary	Maximum treated as target	Safe boundary must be below maximum with explicit margin
No checkpoints	Plan to check only at the end	Place checkpoints at 25%, 50%, 75%
Fixed limits	"I can always do N" without context	Limits depend on complexity, energy, familiarity
Bravado	"I'll just push through"	Fatigue curves are real. Session 1 quality ≠ session 5 quality

---

Depth Scaling

Depth	Dimensions Estimated	Planning Fallacy Checks	Checkpoints	Tradeoff Analysis
1x	2	2	1	Binary (which to prioritize)
2x	3	4	3	Full triangle
4x	3 + sub-dimensions	All 5	4 with indicators	Triangle + scenario analysis
8x	3 + sub-dimensions	All + custom biases	5 with contingencies	Full with fallback plans

Default: 2x. These are floors.

---

Pre-Completion Checklist

• Context assessed (resources, complexity, experience)
• All three dimensions estimated (scope, throughput, quality)
• Optimistic/realistic/pessimistic ranges provided
• Planning fallacy discount applied
• Tradeoff triangle made explicit
• Safe boundary is below maximum with stated margin
• Danger zones identified
• Checkpoints placed with specific indicators

---

Integration

• Use from: project planning, sprint planning, session planning
• Complementary: /iagca (when scope needs compression after limit found)
• Complementary: /de (dependency extraction within safe scope)
• Differs from /iagca: iagca compresses scope after sprawl; awtlytrn estimates limits before committing