Source profileQuality 90/100

nyldn/claude-octopus/skills/skill-decision-support/SKILL.md

skill-decision-support

Present options with trade-offs for informed decision-making — use when choosing between approaches

Source repository stars
4,000
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
0
Last source update
2026-08-24
Source checked
2026-08-25

Decision brief

What it does: where it fits

Present options with trade-offs for informed decision-making — use when choosing between approaches

Best for

  • Asks for options or alternatives
  • Says "fix or provide options"
  • Needs help deciding between approaches

Not for

  • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
  • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus --skill "skills/skill-decision-support"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "skill-decision-support" from https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus/blob/bc76e7c8248c93cfc4ba621ac5421077710777d0/skills/skill-decision-support/SKILL.md at commit bc76e7c8248c93cfc4ba621ac5421077710777d0. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    The Process

    Use AskUserQuestion if needed to understand: - Must-have requirements - Nice-to-have features - Deal-breakers - Timeline constraints - Budget/resource constraints

    Must-have requirementsNice-to-have featuresDeal-breakers
  2. 02

    Phase 1: Context Understanding

    Use AskUserQuestion if needed to understand: - Must-have requirements - Nice-to-have features - Deal-breakers - Timeline constraints - Budget/resource constraints

    Must-have requirementsNice-to-have featuresDeal-breakers
  3. 03

    Step 1: Understand the Decision Point

    Review the “Step 1: Understand the Decision Point” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Step 1: Understand the Decision Point” source section.
  4. 04

    Step 2: Gather Requirements

    Use AskUserQuestion if needed to understand: - Must-have requirements - Nice-to-have features - Deal-breakers - Timeline constraints - Budget/resource constraints

    Must-have requirementsNice-to-have featuresDeal-breakers
  5. 05

    Phase 2: Generate Options

    Generate 2-4 distinct options (not just variations):

    Violate stated constraintsAre clearly inferior to othersAre essentially the same with minor tweaks

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

No configured static risk pattern was detected

This is not proof of safety. Runtime behavior, indirect dependencies, and hidden external systems are outside the static scan.

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score90/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars4,000SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
nyldn/claude-octopus
Skill path
skills/skill-decision-support/SKILL.md
Commit
bc76e7c8248c93cfc4ba621ac5421077710777d0
License
MIT
Collected
2026-08-25
Default branch
main
View the original SKILL.md

Host: Codex CLI — This skill was designed for Claude Code and adapted for Codex. Cross-reference commands use installed skill names in Codex rather than /octo:* slash commands. Use the active Codex shell and subagent tools. Do not claim a provider, model, or host subagent is available until the current session exposes it. For host tool equivalents, see skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md.

Decision Support & Options Presentation

Overview

Structured approach to presenting options and alternatives with clear trade-offs, enabling informed decision-making.

Core principle: Understand context → Generate options → Analyze trade-offs → Present clearly → Support choice.

When to Use

Use this skill when user:

  • Asks for options or alternatives
  • Says "fix or provide options"
  • Needs help deciding between approaches
  • Wants to see different ways to solve a problem
  • Is uncertain about best path forward

Do NOT use for:

  • General research ("what is X?") → use flow-probe
  • Implementation work → use flow-tangle
  • Simple yes/no questions
  • Already-decided approaches

The Process

Phase 1: Context Understanding

Step 1: Understand the Decision Point

**Decision Context:**

What needs to be decided: [the core question]
Why it matters: [impact of this decision]
Constraints: [time, resources, compatibility, etc.]
Current state: [what exists now]

Step 2: Gather Requirements

Use AskUserQuestion if needed to understand:

  • Must-have requirements
  • Nice-to-have features
  • Deal-breakers
  • Timeline constraints
  • Budget/resource constraints

Phase 2: Generate Options

Step 1: Identify Viable Approaches

Generate 2-4 distinct options (not just variations):

Option TypeWhen to Include
ConservativeLow risk, proven approach
ModerateBalanced risk/reward
InnovativeHigher risk, potentially better outcome
MinimalSimplest possible solution

Don't generate options that:

  • Violate stated constraints
  • Are clearly inferior to others
  • Are essentially the same with minor tweaks

Step 2: Research Each Option

For each option, understand:

  • How it works
  • What it requires
  • What the outcome looks like
  • What could go wrong

Phase 3: Trade-off Analysis

For each option, analyze:

### Option N: [Name]

**Description:**
[1-2 sentence description]

**Pros:**
- ✅ [Advantage 1]
- ✅ [Advantage 2]
- ✅ [Advantage 3]

**Cons:**
- ❌ [Disadvantage 1]
- ❌ [Disadvantage 2]
- ❌ [Disadvantage 3]

**Effort:** [Low/Medium/High]
**Risk:** [Low/Medium/High]
**Reversibility:** [Easy/Moderate/Difficult to undo]

**Best for:** [when this option makes sense]

Phase 4: Present Options

Format for Presentation

# Decision: [What needs to be decided]

**Context:** [Brief summary of why this decision is needed]


## Option 1: [Conservative/Proven Approach] ⭐ (Recommended)

**What it is:**
[Clear explanation in 1-2 sentences]

**Pros:**
- ✅ [Pro 1]
- ✅ [Pro 2]
- ✅ [Pro 3]

**Cons:**
- ❌ [Con 1]
- ❌ [Con 2]

**Implementation:**
[Brief overview of what's involved]

**Timeline:** [estimate]
**Risk Level:** Low/Medium/High


## Option 2: [Alternative Approach]

[Same structure as Option 1]


## Option 3: [Another Alternative]

[Same structure as Option 1]


## Recommendation

**I recommend Option [N]: [Name]**

**Why:**
1. [Reason 1]
2. [Reason 2]
3. [Reason 3]

**This option is best because:** [summary of key advantage relative to context]


## Quick Comparison

| Criteria | Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 |
|----------|----------|----------|----------|
| Effort | [level] | [level] | [level] |
| Risk | [level] | [level] | [level] |
| Reversible | [yes/no] | [yes/no] | [yes/no] |
| Timeline | [time] | [time] | [time] |
| Best for | [scenario] | [scenario] | [scenario] |


**Which option would you like to proceed with?**

Guidelines for Presentation

  1. Mark recommendation clearly with ⭐ or "(Recommended)"
  2. Limit to 2-4 options (too many = decision paralysis)
  3. Be honest about cons (don't oversell any option)
  4. Make comparison easy (use consistent structure)
  5. Support with reasoning (explain why recommendation makes sense)

Phase 5: Support the Choice

After user chooses:

✅ **Proceeding with Option [N]: [Name]**

**Next steps:**
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
3. [Step 3]

**I'll now [begin implementation / gather more details / create plan].**

If user asks for more info on a specific option:

**Deep dive on Option [N]:**

**How it works:**
[Detailed explanation]

**Implementation steps:**
1. [Detailed step 1]
2. [Detailed step 2]
...

**Potential issues and mitigations:**
- Issue: [potential problem]
  Mitigation: [how to handle it]

**Would you like to proceed with this option?**

Common Patterns

Pattern 1: "Fix or Provide Options"

User: "The auth system is broken. Fix or provide options."

Response structure:
1. Assess: Is the fix obvious or are there choices?
2. If obvious: Present the fix + ask for confirmation
3. If choices: Present options with trade-offs

Example:

I can see the auth issue. Here are your options:

**Option 1: Quick Fix** (Recommended for immediate deployment)
- Patch the current JWT validation
- Pros: Fast, low risk
- Cons: Doesn't address underlying architecture

**Option 2: Comprehensive Refactor**
- Rebuild auth with better patterns
- Pros: Long-term solution
- Cons: Takes longer, more testing needed

**Which approach fits your timeline?**

Pattern 2: "What Are My Options"

User: "I need to add caching. What are my options?"

Response structure:
1. Understand requirements (what needs caching, scale, etc.)
2. Generate 3-4 caching options
3. Present with trade-offs
4. Recommend based on their context

Example:

For caching your API responses, here are the main options:

**Option 1: In-Memory Cache (Node-cache)** ⭐
- Best for: Single-server setup
- Pros: Simple, fast, no external dependencies
- Cons: Lost on restart, doesn't scale across servers

**Option 2: Redis**
- Best for: Multi-server or persistence needed
- Pros: Persistent, distributed, feature-rich
- Cons: Requires Redis server, more complex

**Option 3: CDN Caching (Cloudflare/Fastly)**
- Best for: Static/semi-static content
- Pros: Global distribution, handles scale
- Cons: Less control, costs, public content only

**Based on your single-server setup, Option 1 is recommended.**
Which would you like to use?

Pattern 3: "Help Me Decide"

User: "Should I use TypeScript or stick with JavaScript? Help me decide."

Response structure:
1. Clarify decision factors (team size, project scope, timeline)
2. Present structured comparison
3. Make recommendation based on their specific context
4. Support whatever they choose

Example:

Let me help you decide between TypeScript and JavaScript.

**TypeScript:**
Pros: Type safety, better tooling, catches errors early
Cons: Learning curve, build step, more setup
Best for: Larger teams, long-term projects, complex domains

**JavaScript:**
Pros: Simpler, no build step, familiar to all devs
Cons: Runtime errors, less IDE support, harder to refactor
Best for: Small projects, prototypes, simple applications

**For your [context]:** I recommend TypeScript because [reason].

Would you like to proceed with TypeScript, or would JavaScript be better for your needs?

Integration with Other Skills

With flow-probe

Need to research options thoroughly?
→ Use flow-probe to gather information
→ Use skill-decision-support to present findings as options

With flow-tangle

User chose an option?
→ Use flow-tangle to implement the chosen approach

With skill-debug

Bug could be fixed multiple ways?
→ Use skill-decision-support to present fix options
→ Use skill-debug to implement chosen fix systematically

Best Practices

1. Tailor to User's Needs

Ask about constraints:

Before presenting options, I need to understand:
- Timeline: How urgent is this?
- Resources: What's available (team size, budget, infrastructure)?
- Risk tolerance: Is this production-critical or experimental?
- Reversibility: Must this decision be reversible?

2. Quantify When Possible

Good:

**Timeline:**
- Option 1: 2-3 hours
- Option 2: 1-2 days
- Option 3: 1 week

Poor:

**Timeline:**
- Option 1: Quick
- Option 2: A while
- Option 3: Longer

3. Be Honest About Unknowns

**Option 2: Microservices Architecture**

⚠️ **Unknown:** Migration effort could be 2-4 weeks depending on current coupling.
Would need to audit codebase to give accurate estimate.

4. Provide "Escape Hatch"

Always include:

**Not satisfied with these options?**

I can also:
- Research more alternatives
- Combine aspects of multiple options
- Deep-dive on any specific approach
- Prototype a solution to test viability

Red Flags - Don't Do This

ActionWhy It's Wrong
Only present one "option"That's not a choice
Present 8+ optionsDecision paralysis
Hide significant consUser can't make informed choice
Recommend without reasoningUser can't evaluate recommendation
Ignore stated constraintsWasting user's time
Present obviously bad options as viableUndermines trust

Quick Reference

User RequestAction
"fix or provide options"Assess if fix obvious → If yes: present fix, if no: present options
"what are my options"Understand context → Generate 2-4 options → Present with trade-offs
"help me decide"Clarify decision factors → Compare approaches → Recommend with reasoning
"show alternatives"Generate alternatives → Analyze pros/cons → Present structured comparison

The Bottom Line

Decision support → Clear options + Honest trade-offs + Reasoned recommendation
Otherwise → Confusion + Poor decisions + Regret

Understand context. Present real choices. Support with reasoning. Respect their decision.

Frequently asked questions

What to verify before installation and use

What does the skill-decision-support source document cover?

Present options with trade-offs for informed decision-making — use when choosing between approaches

How do I install skill-decision-support?

The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus --skill "skills/skill-decision-support". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 10045,511

coreyhaines31/marketingskills

ab-testing

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program

Computed 10024,921

alirezarezvani/claude-skills

app-store-optimization

App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist

Computed 100152

JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills

suede-ab-testing

Suede-owned experimentation discipline for hypotheses, sample sizing, test duration, significance, and repeatable experiment programs. Use when comparing variants, deciding whether a result is reliable, or building an experiment backlog and cadence. NOT FOR: analytics instrumentation (use suede-analytics), post-click conversion diagnosis (use suede-site-alchemy), or writing the variant copy itself (use suede-copy).

Computed 10035

tenequm/skills

founder-playbook

Decision validation and thinking frameworks for startup founders. Use when you need to pressure-test a decision, validate your next steps, think through strategic options, or sanity-check your approach. Triggers on phrases like "should I", "help me think through", "is this the right move", "validate my thinking", "what am I missing". Covers fundraising, customer development, runway management, prioritization, and crypto/web3 founder challenges.