L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Données et recherche · SKILL.md

s4h-decision-reversibility-analysis

s4h-decision-reversibility-analysis

Categorises a decision by reversibility and applies the appropriate level of process rigour. Triggers: 'is this reversible', 'how much should I think about this', 'one-way door', 'two-way door', 'decision type', 'how committed is this'.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: s4h-decision-reversibility-analysis description: "Categorises a decision by reversibility and applies the appropriate level of process rigour. Triggers: 'is this reversible', 'how much should I think about this', 'one-way door', 'two-way door', 'decision type', 'how committed is this'."

Decision Reversibility Analysis

Most people apply the same amount of thinking to every decision. This is wrong in both directions: it produces analysis paralysis on easy reversible choices, and recklessness on decisions that cannot be undone. The right question before deciding is not "what should I choose?" — it is "how much should I invest in choosing?"


Your Process

Step 1: State the Decision Write the decision clearly. Include what is actually being committed to — not the framing, the underlying commitment.

Framing check: Confirm the decision and its underlying commitment before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual decision being assessed and what would be locked in if made — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:

  • Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the decision and its underlying commitment]. Is that right?"
  • Header: "Framing"
  • Options:
    • Yes — proceed — framing is correct
    • Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
    • Reframe — different decision than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding

Step 2: Assess Reversal Cost If this decision turns out to be wrong, how expensive is it to undo? Consider: financial cost, time cost, relationship or trust cost, technical debt introduced, market position lost, and optionality foreclosed. Be concrete — not "expensive" but "six months of re-architecture and two broken partnerships."

Step 3: Classify — Type 1 or Type 2

  • Type 1 (one-way door): reversing is very costly or practically impossible. Wrong here means significant, durable damage.
  • Type 2 (two-way door): can be walked back at low cost if wrong. A review point or small experiment can reveal the error before it compounds.

Step 4: Apply the Appropriate Process

  • Type 1: slow down. Consult broadly. Surface dissent. Apply full analytical rigour. Set explicit criteria for what "good" looks like before committing.
  • Type 2: decide quickly. Set a review point. Move. Do not let this consume the time budget of a Type 1 decision.

Step 5: Flag Misclassification Risk Some decisions feel reversible but aren't. Network effects, sunk cost psychology, technical lock-in, and relationship damage can make nominal two-way doors practically one-way. Identify these explicitly.


Human Check-in

Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:

  • Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
  • Header: "Scope"
  • Options:
    • Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
    • Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
    • Reversibility verdict only — Is this reversible or not, and what that means for how much deliberation it deserves
    • Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing

Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.

Output Format

Decision: [Statement — including the underlying commitment]

Reversal cost:

[Concrete statement of what undoing this actually costs — time / money / relationships / technical / optionality]

Classification: Type 1 (one-way door) / Type 2 (two-way door)

Recommended process level:

TypeProcess
Type 1Slow down — broad consultation, explicit success criteria, full rigour
Type 2Decide quickly — set review point, move, learn

Misclassification risk:

[Reasons this might be harder to reverse than it appears — or easier]

Recommendation:

[Classification + what to do next based on it]


Notes

The most expensive error is treating a Type 1 decision as Type 2 — deciding quickly on something that cannot be undone. But the second-most expensive error is treating Type 2 decisions as Type 1, because the opportunity cost of delay is real and cumulative.


What's Next

After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:

  • Question: "Reversibility assessed. What's next?"
  • Header: "Next"
  • Options:
    • /s4h-decision-premortem-analysis — If it's a one-way door, stress-test it thoroughly
    • /s4h-decision-criteria-weighting — Weight decision criteria differently given reversibility level
    • /s4h-resource-allocation-analysis — Calibrate resource investment to match reversibility
    • Done — Wrap up and synthesise what we have so far
Skills enregistrées