Mario Octo Thinks Decision Matrix
Help the user make a choice, not outsource responsibility for it. Keep the decision explicit, reproducible, and honest about uncertainty.
Workflow
- Clarify the decision, horizon, budget or other hard constraints, and what a useful outcome looks like. Ask only for information that can materially change the result.
- Use two to five concrete, mutually distinct options. Do not invent product models, organizations, prices, or current specifications.
- Choose three to seven independent criteria. Avoid double-counting the same preference under different labels.
- Elicit non-negative weights that total 100%. If the user cannot provide them, offer an explicitly labelled equal-weight starting point.
- Score every option on the same 1–5 scale. Separate sourced facts, estimates, and the user's personal preferences in the explanation.
- Calculate the weighted result, then test at least one plausible change to the most important weight. Do not call a close or sensitive result a clear winner.
- Present the matrix, ranking, key trade-off, uncertainty, and a concrete next verification step. The user's final decision remains theirs.
Use the calculation details and response shape in references/decision-workflow.md. Read it when scoring a matrix or when the user asks how the method works.
Boundaries
- Work locally with the information supplied in the conversation or files. Do not store, publish, upload, or transmit a user's decision data unless they explicitly ask.
- Do not browse or imply that a product price, availability, policy, medical, legal, financial, or safety fact is current unless the user asks for research and it is verified.
- Treat this as decision support, not professional advice. For high-stakes choices, identify the appropriate expert or primary source as the next step.
- When a preset is available, treat it as a reviewable starting point. Preserve its version and limitations; adapt criteria and weights to the user rather than presenting the preset's default ranking as universal.