/analyze

Multi-Persona Analysis Command

Orchestrate sophisticated multi-perspective analysis of problems using the split-team framework. Assemble optimal persona teams, facilitate cognitive harmonics, and synthesize insights through productive disagreement.

How It Works

This command invokes the persona-coordinator agent to:

1. Analyze your problem and determine required perspectives
2. Assemble an optimal team of 3-7 persona agents
3. Orchestrate divergent analysis from each perspective
4. Facilitate productive disagreement and assumption challenging
5. Synthesize insights into coherent, actionable recommendations

Arguments

$1 (Required): Problem statement or question to analyze

$2 (Optional): Complexity level

• simple: 3-4 personas, straightforward analysis
• moderate: 5-6 personas, balanced trade-offs (default)
• complex: 7+ personas, multifaceted challenges

$3 (Optional): Number of personas (3-10)

• Overrides complexity-based team size
• Must be between 3 and 10

Examples

Simple Analysis

/analyze "Should we use REST or GraphQL for our API?" simple

Assembles: Analytical Thinker + Pragmatic Realist + Systems Architect

Moderate Analysis (Default)

/analyze "Design an authentication system for our platform"

Assembles: Systems Architect + Risk Analyst + User Advocate + Pragmatic Realist + Constructive Critic

Complex Analysis

/analyze "Should we migrate from monolith to microservices?" complex

Assembles: Systems Architect + Risk Analyst + Pragmatic Realist + Creative Innovator + Constructive Critic + User Advocate + Analytical Thinker

Custom Team Size

/analyze "Evaluate our tech stack choices" moderate 6

Assembles: 6 most relevant personas for the problem

Use Cases

Architecture Decisions

• Technology selection
• System design choices
• Migration strategies
• Scaling approaches

Product Strategy

• Feature prioritization
• User experience design
• Market positioning
• Competitive analysis

Technical Challenges

• Performance optimization
• Security hardening
• Debugging complex issues
• Code architecture review

Strategic Planning

• Long-term technology roadmap
• Resource allocation
• Risk assessment
• Innovation opportunities

What You Get

1. Diverse Perspectives: Each persona contributes unique insights through their specialized lens
2. Productive Disagreement: Constructive challenge of assumptions and alternatives
3. Cognitive Harmonics: Emergent insights from persona interactions
4. Synthesis: Coherent integration of perspectives with clear recommendations
5. Trade-off Clarity: Explicit acknowledgment of competing concerns and balanced choices

Split-Team Framework Principles

Voice Differentiation: Each persona maintains unique vocabulary, questions, and analytical approach

Cognitive Harmonics: Multiple perspectives create constructive interference for emergent insights

Productive Disagreement: Systematic challenge strengthens solutions and prevents groupthink

Integration Synthesis: Coordinator weaves perspectives into coherent, actionable guidance

Tips for Best Results

1. Be Specific: Provide context and constraints in your problem statement
2. State Goals: Mention success criteria or what you're optimizing for
3. Match Complexity: Use simple for straightforward questions, complex for critical decisions
4. Trust the Process: Persona disagreement is valuable, not problematic
5. Implementation Focus: Include practical constraints for realistic recommendations

Example Session

/analyze "We need to choose between PostgreSQL and MongoDB for user data storage. We have 10M users, need strong consistency, but want flexibility for future features." moderate

Result: Assembles 5 personas who examine through data/performance (Analytical Thinker), implementation reality (Pragmatic Realist), system architecture (Systems Architect), risk factors (Risk Analyst), and challenges assumptions (Constructive Critic). Synthesis provides clear recommendation with rationale and acknowledged trade-offs.

Invoke the persona-coordinator agent with: $ARGUMENTS