Decision Matrix
Stop going in circles — define criteria, weight importance, score options, and let the math reveal what your gut already knows.
You've been going back and forth on this decision for weeks. Every time you think you've decided, a new consideration pops up and you're back to square one. Your brain isn't built to weigh 7 criteria across 4 options simultaneously.
Who it's for: professionals making career decisions, teams choosing between vendors or tools, founders deciding on strategic direction, couples making major life decisions, anyone stuck in analysis paralysis on an important choice
Example
"Help me decide between 4 job offers" → Criteria defined (salary, growth, culture, location, role fit), importance weights assigned, each option scored, weighted totals calculated, and a devil's advocate challenge of the winner — saved as a file for future reference
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
# Decision Matrix
## Role
You help me make structured decisions by building weighted scoring matrices. You challenge my assumptions, play devil's advocate, and ensure I'm not fooling myself with biased scoring.
## Directory Structure
- `decision.md` — The decision matrix with criteria, weights, and scores
- `research/` — Research notes for each option
- `analysis.md` — Final analysis with winner, caveats, and devil's advocate
## Matrix Structure
| Criterion | Weight (1-10) | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|-----------|--------------|----------|----------|----------|
| [Criteria] | [Weight] | [Score 1-10] | [Score 1-10] | [Score 1-10] |
| **Weighted Total** | | **Sum** | **Sum** | **Sum** |
## Rules
1. Criteria must be specific and measurable, not vague
2. Weights must reflect actual priorities, not what sounds good
3. Every score needs a justification note
4. Always run devil's advocate on the top choice
5. Flag any criteria where the user seems biased
## Commands
- "/decide [options] [purpose]" — Set up a new decision matrix
- "/research [option]" — Research and score one option against all criteria
- "/calculate" — Calculate weighted scores and identify winner
- "/challenge" — Play devil's advocate on the top choice
- "/sensitivity" — Test how changing weights affects the outcomeGet new playbooks like this one
One email a week with new Claude Code workflows. Free, like everything here.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
What This Does
Breaks the cycle of circular decision-making. Forces you to define what matters, assign honest weights, score each option, and then play devil's advocate on the winner. The structured file-based approach means you can revisit your reasoning later.
Inspired by Marco Kotrotsos's 20 Non-Coding Uses for Claude's Code Mode.
Prerequisites
- Claude Code installed
- A decision with 2+ options
- Willingness to define what actually matters to you
Step-by-Step Setup
- Create a decisions folder
- Save the CLAUDE.md template
- Start with
/decideto frame your decision - Research and score each option
- Calculate and then challenge the result
Example Usage
"I'm deciding between 3 CRM tools for my team. Set up a decision matrix"
"The criteria that matter: price, ease of use, integrations, support, scalability"
"Research Option A and score it against each criterion"
"Calculate weighted scores — who wins overall and on my top 3 criteria?"
"Play devil's advocate — what am I not seeing about the top choice?"
"What if I weight 'ease of use' higher — does the winner change?"
Tips
- Be honest with weights — if price matters most, weight it highest
- Score before calculating totals to avoid anchoring bias
- The devil's advocate step is where the real value lives
- Sensitivity analysis reveals if your decision is fragile or robust