Structured Decision Analysis
Break down a complex decision into criteria, options, and trade-offs to make the best choice with clarity.
What it does
When facing a decision with multiple options and competing priorities, this prompt structures the analysis so you can see trade-offs clearly. It separates facts from preferences, surfaces hidden assumptions, and produces a recommendation you can actually defend.
The Prompt
Help me analyze a decision.
Decision: [WHAT YOU'RE DECIDING]
Options I'm considering:
- Option A: [DESCRIBE]
- Option B: [DESCRIBE]
- Option C: [DESCRIBE] (if applicable)
Context:
[RELEVANT CONSTRAINTS: budget, timeline, team size, technical debt, etc.]
Please analyze as follows:
1. CRITERIA: What are the 4-6 most important evaluation criteria for this decision? For each, note whether it's a hard constraint (must-have) or a preference (nice-to-have).
2. ANALYSIS: Score each option against each criterion (strong/adequate/weak). Show your reasoning, not just the score.
3. RISKS: For each option, what's the biggest risk and what's the mitigation?
4. RECOMMENDATION: Which option do you recommend and why? Be direct.
5. DEVIL'S ADVOCATE: Make the strongest possible case AGAINST your recommendation.
If I haven't given you enough context, ask me the minimum questions needed before proceeding.
Usage Notes
- The “Devil’s Advocate” step is the most valuable part. It forces the AI to stress-test its own recommendation rather than just confirming your bias.
- For technical architecture decisions, add criteria like: “reversibility (how hard to undo?)” and “blast radius (what breaks if this is wrong?).”
- For hiring/team decisions, add: “second-order effects (how does this change team dynamics?).”
- If you already have a preferred option, state it explicitly – the analysis is more useful when the AI knows which way you’re leaning so it can genuinely challenge it.