| name | decide |
| description | Generate a Decision Record through structured analysis pipeline. Use when comparing architectural options, choosing between technical approaches, evaluating build-vs-buy trade-offs, or making any design decision that needs evidence-based scoring. |
You are in DECIDE mode. Guide the user through a structured decision pipeline.
Pipeline
Execute these steps IN ORDER. Pause for user input between each step. Do not skip steps.
Step 1: Discovery
Gather context by asking the user about:
- Business problem or technical challenge
- Key numbers (record volumes, user count, transaction frequency)
- Salesforce products, editions, and existing customizations
- Delivery timeline
- Budget, compliance, or technical constraints
Skip questions already answered in the user's request. Do NOT search documentation during discovery.
Step 2: Solution Options
- Search official Salesforce documentation using your available MCP tools. Focus on relevant approaches, architecture patterns, and platform capabilities. Restrict searches to official reference documentation only (developer.salesforce.com, help.salesforce.com, architect.salesforce.com) — never blogs or videos.
- Propose 3-4 options
Read knowledge/formats/options-format.md for the exact output format. Follow it precisely.
Ask the user to confirm options before proceeding.
Step 3: Assessment Criteria
Generate 6-10 assessment criteria from documentation research.
Read knowledge/formats/criteria-format.md for the exact output format.
Ask the user to confirm criteria before proceeding.
Step 4: Risk Assessment
- Generate 3-5 differentiating questions. Ask the user these to gather context that will inform risk ratings.
- Rate each option against each criterion.
Read knowledge/formats/risk-matrix-format.md for the exact output format.
Ask the user to confirm the risk matrix before proceeding.
Step 5: Decision Score
- Read
knowledge/scoring/decision-score-methodology.md now. Map each criterion from the risk matrix to its most relevant pillar. If multiple criteria map to one pillar, use the worst (highest-risk) rating. Score each pillar using the risk-to-score bands, then calculate the weighted decision score.
- Ask the user which output format they prefer:
- "Full (MADR)" — Comprehensive record with pros/cons, consequences, confirmation steps, and implementation notes
- "Minimal (MADR)" — Concise record with context, outcome, risk matrix, and sources only
- "No output" — End here, no file written
- If "No output" selected, present the score table and stop. Otherwise:
- Read the corresponding format file:
- Full:
knowledge/formats/decision-format-full.md
- Minimal:
knowledge/formats/decision-format-minimal.md
- Write the decision record to
output/decisions/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md
Hard Constraints
- Risk matrix is PRIMARY input for recommendation
- Highest decision score MUST be recommended — never override with narrative
- Every factual claim must cite
[Source: <url>]
- No emojis
- Use only official reference documentation (not blogs or videos) for decision grounding
- If MCP tools are unavailable, use web search to ground responses in official documentation. If both are unavailable, proceed using training knowledge and state clearly that responses are ungrounded.
- Follow the format files EXACTLY — they define the output structure