# Wazzap Approaches

> Phase 3 of /wazzap — generate 3 distinct approaches (conservative / adjacent / bold) with pros, cons, and a comparison table. Use when the user invokes /wazzap:approaches or wants to weigh options.

- Skill: `enw/wazzap-approaches` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add enw/wazzap-approaches`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/enw/wazzap-approaches/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: enw (https://skillmd.com/u/enw)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/enw/wazzap-approaches

---


# `/wazzap:approaches` — "Different ways forward"

Phase 3 of 4. **Mode: divergent generation + structured comparison.** Generate 3 *distinct* approaches across different lenses so the user has a real choice — not three flavors of the same answer.

## Goal

Produce `approaches.md` with exactly 3 named options, comparable on the same dimensions, plus a recommendation and a decision (or `pending`).

## Preconditions

1. Read parent `SKILL.md`.
2. Resolve active decision; read `up.md` and `real.md`.
3. **Soft-gate check:** if no `real.md`, warn ("No real.md — `:approaches` without `:real` tends to misfire. Continue anyway?"). On proceed, write a stub `real.md` and continue.

## The three lenses

Generate one option per lens. **Distinctness is the rule** — if two options are mostly the same with cosmetic differences, replace one.

| Lens | Mindset | Tends to look like |
|---|---|---|
| **Conservative** | Smallest move that addresses the real problem. Preserves existing investments. Lowest risk. | Patch / tweak / add a check / clarify a process |
| **Adjacent** | One step further than conservative. Touches related systems or stakeholders. Medium risk, medium reward. | Refactor / new feature / different tool / new agreement |
| **Bold** | Reframes the problem entirely or makes a big bet. Highest risk, highest leverage. May invalidate constraints from `:real`. | Rebuild / pivot / fire / hire / quit / acquire / shut down |

If a lens genuinely produces nothing useful for this decision (rare), say so explicitly and fill with the strongest alternative — but flag it.

## Steps

1. **Read context.** `up.md` for the wish; `real.md` for the real problem, constraints, and success criteria.

2. **Draft 3 options**, one per lens. For each:
   - **Name** (short, distinctive — "Move to JWT" not "Option 2")
   - **One-line pitch**
   - **Description** (3–6 sentences)
   - **Pros** (3–5 bullets, tied to the success criteria from `:real` where possible)
   - **Cons** (3–5 bullets — be honest, this is the audit trail)
   - **Risks** (what could go wrong, distinct from cons)
   - **Rough effort** (your judgment in plain language: "an afternoon", "a sprint", "a quarter", "I genuinely don't know")
   - **What it requires** (people, money, tools, conversations, permissions)

3. **Build a comparison table.** Columns: Conservative / Adjacent / Bold. Rows: Effort, Risk, Reversibility, Time-to-impact, Stakeholder cost, Alignment with success criteria. Use short cells (1–3 words).

4. **Recommend** one option. Lead with the recommendation, give 2–3 sentences of rationale tied to the real problem and constraints. Be honest if the lenses are genuinely close — say so.

5. **Show the user.** Format: comparison table first, then expanded option cards, then your recommendation. Ask: *"Pick one (or hybrid two), or want me to explore further?"*

6. **Handle the user's response:**
   - **Pick** → set `chosen_approach` in manifest, fill the **Decision** section in the doc.
   - **Hybrid** → write a 4th option labeled "Hybrid: <name>" combining elements; set that as `chosen_approach`.
   - **Reject all / explore further** → ask what's missing, regenerate (don't just rotate). Cap regeneration at 2 rounds before stopping with `chosen_approach: pending`.
   - **Defer** → set `status: thinking`, write **Decision: deferred until <reason/date>**.

7. **Write `approaches.md`** with the chosen option recorded.

8. **Update manifest:** `current_phase: approaches`, append `approaches` to `completed_phases`, set `chosen_approach`, set `status: decided` (if user chose) or leave `status: thinking` (if deferred). Bump `updated_at`.

9. **Suggest next command:** `/wazzap:go` (if decided) or "come back when you're ready" (if deferred).

## `approaches.md` template

```markdown
# Approaches (Phase 3)

**Slug:** `<slug>`
**Generated:** <ISO timestamp>
**Real problem (from `:real`):** <one-sentence carried over>

## Comparison

| Dimension | Conservative: <name> | Adjacent: <name> | Bold: <name> |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effort | ... | ... | ... |
| Risk | ... | ... | ... |
| Reversibility | ... | ... | ... |
| Time-to-impact | ... | ... | ... |
| Stakeholder cost | ... | ... | ... |
| Alignment w/ success criteria | ... | ... | ... |

## Option 1 — Conservative: <name>

**Pitch:** <one line>

**Description:** <3–6 sentences>

**Pros:**
- ...

**Cons:**
- ...

**Risks:**
- ...

**Rough effort:** <plain language>

**What it requires:**
- ...

## Option 2 — Adjacent: <name>

[same shape as Option 1]

## Option 3 — Bold: <name>

[same shape as Option 1]

## Recommendation

**Recommended:** <option name>

<2–3 sentences tying back to the real problem and constraints. Be honest if the call is close.>

## Decision

**Chosen:** <option name OR "Hybrid: <name> (combines X from N1 with Y from N2)" OR "pending" OR "deferred until <reason>">

**Decided by:** <user>
**Decided at:** <ISO timestamp, or "—" if pending/deferred>

**Reasoning (user's words):**
<verbatim from user when they chose, or "—">
```

If the user picked a hybrid, add a fourth option section before the **Decision** block:

```markdown
## Option 4 — Hybrid: <name>

**Combines:** <which elements from which options>
**Description:** ...
**Pros / Cons / Risks / Effort / Requires:** ... (same shape)
```

## Revisits (re-running `:approaches` later)

If `approaches.md` already exists, **append** a new revisit section instead of overwriting:

```markdown
---
## Revisited <ISO timestamp>

**Trigger:** <why we're re-exploring>

### What changed since last round
- <e.g. "New constraint from :real revisit", "Original chosen approach turned out to be infeasible">

### New options
[3 fresh options under conservative/adjacent/bold lenses]

### Comparison (this round)
[table]

### Recommendation (this round)
...

### Decision (this round)
...
```

Update manifest `revisits[]` and (if a new option is chosen) overwrite `chosen_approach` — but keep the old one in the prior section.

## Output to user (when an option is chosen)

```
✓ approaches.md written.

Chosen: <option name>
Status: decided

Next: /wazzap:go to turn this into a concrete plan.
```

## Output to user (when deferred)

```
✓ approaches.md written.

Decision: deferred until <reason>
Status: thinking

Resume anytime with /wazzap:resume <slug>.
```

## Anti-patterns to avoid in `:approaches`

- ❌ Three options that are basically the same with renamed labels. If conservative and adjacent feel identical, push adjacent harder or be honest that adjacent doesn't apply here.
- ❌ Skipping the comparison table. The table is the audit-trail summary — without it, the doc is just three blurbs.
- ❌ Hiding cons. If the recommended option has a real downside, name it. Future-you reading this needs the honest version.
- ❌ Letting the user reject all 3 without asking *what's missing*. Otherwise round 2 will miss the same way.
- ❌ Generating a 4th, 5th, 6th option proactively. 3 is the cap. Hybrids only happen on user request.
- ❌ Forgetting to fill the **Decision** section. Even "pending" is a decision worth recording.

## Self-check before finishing

- [ ] Exactly 3 options (or 4 if user requested a hybrid).
- [ ] Each option has all fields filled (pitch, description, pros, cons, risks, effort, requires).
- [ ] Comparison table is present and uses short cells.
- [ ] Recommendation is named with rationale.
- [ ] Decision section is filled (chosen / hybrid / pending / deferred — never blank).
- [ ] Manifest `chosen_approach` reflects the decision.
- [ ] Status is `decided` (chose) or `thinking` (pending/deferred).
- [ ] Suggested next command in output.