From team-core
Structure a decision as: one problem, three options with real trade-offs, one recommendation. Use when someone asks for options, wants to choose between approaches, or needs help framing a decision for others to weigh in on.
npx claudepluginhub sitloboi2012/team-marketplace --plugin team-coreThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Force a decision into a useful shape: **1** problem, **3** real options, **1** recommendation. Not a menu. Not a wishlist. A call, with the reasoning exposed so others can disagree.
Guides Next.js Cache Components and Partial Prerendering (PPR): 'use cache' directives, cacheLife(), cacheTag(), revalidateTag() for caching, invalidation, static/dynamic optimization. Auto-activates on cacheComponents: true.
Guides building MCP servers enabling LLMs to interact with external services via tools. Covers best practices, TypeScript/Node (MCP SDK), Python (FastMCP).
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Force a decision into a useful shape: 1 problem, 3 real options, 1 recommendation. Not a menu. Not a wishlist. A call, with the reasoning exposed so others can disagree.
One sentence. The decision to make, stated without implementation detail. Not "should we use Postgres or MySQL?" — "we need a primary datastore for the next 12-24 months of product growth, and we need to pick one by $DATE."
If the problem can't be stated in one sentence, the decision isn't ready — say so and help sharpen the framing first.
Exactly three. Not two (false binary), not five (can't-decide). If you only genuinely have two real options, name a third that's deliberately sub-optimal — often "do nothing" or "buy it instead of build it" — to expose the shape of the trade space.
Each option must be:
For each:
| Dimension | What to include |
|---|---|
| What | 1-2 sentences on the approach |
| Pros | 2-3 bullets. Specific, not "scalable" — "handles 10k req/s with our current schema." |
| Cons | 2-3 bullets. Specific, not "less flexible." |
| Effort | S / M / L / XL with a rough week estimate |
| Reversibility | Two-way door (cheap to change) or one-way door (hard to unwind)? |
If a pro or con is symmetric ("faster" for A is "slower" for B), state it once as a dimension of the trade, not twice.
Pick one. Say why in one sentence. Don't hedge. If the user asks, defend the call.
Also include:
# 1-3-1: <one-line problem statement>
## Problem
<one sentence — no implementation detail>
**Context** (optional, only if needed)
<2-3 sentences on why this decision, why now>
## Options
### A. <name>
**What:** <1-2 sentences>
**Pros:**
- <specific>
**Cons:**
- <specific>
**Effort:** <S/M/L/XL, ~N weeks>
**Reversibility:** <two-way | one-way>
### B. <name>
<same structure>
### C. <name>
<same structure>
## Recommendation: <A | B | C>
<one-sentence reason>
**Definition of done:** <how we'll know this was the right call — specific + dated>
**Implementation plan:**
1. <first step, doable this week>
2. <second step>
3. <third step>
**Trigger to revisit:** <what would change our mind>
/team-core:task-breakdown instead/role-ceo:strategy-check or /role-ceo:office-hoursMethodology inspired by the Nous Research "1-3-1 rule of communication" skill.