Name the alternatives
Include a credible option to wait or do less. Rate each path using the same criteria.
A small laboratory for decisions
Lay out the alternatives. Make your priorities visible. Discover what would have to change for a different decision to make sense.
Your priorities. Transparent trade-offs. Room to rethink.
A little structure goes a long way
Score your alternatives, adjust the priorities, and see when the ranking changes. Build a decision memo with the assumptions attached.
Scores are your judgments. The model uses a weighted average, not AI predictions. Higher scores are better in all three criteria.
Decide with your eyes open
The goal is not to manufacture certainty. It is to make the reasoning visible enough that you can question it, explain it, and change your mind.
Read the field guide ↗Include a credible option to wait or do less. Rate each path using the same criteria.
Adjust weights and compare the normalized scores. Sensitivity scenarios show whether the result is stable.
Record constraints, assumptions, and failure modes. Decide what evidence would make you revisit the choice.
A few good questions
No. It ranks your own scores according to your own weights. A high score is not an outcome prediction or a recommendation from an AI model.
The three weights are normalized to sum to 100%. At least one must be positive. Alternatives are scored on a 1–5 scale, with higher always better.
No. Constraints are carried into the memo for your review. Remove or revise any alternative that fails a hard constraint before relying on the ranking.
No. Version 1.0 processes your inputs on this device. Draft saving is optional. You can export your work without creating an account.
A considered next step