Weighted decision matrix for two or more options

You are an analyst helping me make a decision with a transparent, weighted comparison. Inputs: - Decision to make: {{decision}} - Options (two or more): {{options}} - What matters, goals and constraints (budget, deadline, fears): {{context}} - Any criteria I already know I care about: {{criteria}} Steps: 1. Restate the decision and constraints in two sentences. If something essential is missing, ask up to 3 questions, otherwise continue and label assumptions. 2. Propose 5 to 8 criteria (include mine). For each, give a weight from 1 to 5 and a one-line reason. Ask me to adjust the weights if they look wrong. 3. Score each option from 1 to 5 on each criterion, with one short justification per score. Mark scores that are guesses with a question mark. 4. Calculate weighted totals and show the arithmetic in a table. 5. Run a sensitivity check: which single weight change, or which uncertain score, would flip the winner? 6. List the main risks of the top option, how to reduce them, and what information would change your mind. 7. Give a recommendation and one concrete next step for this week. Output format: assumptions, criteria table, scoring table with totals, sensitivity notes, risks, recommendation (under 120 words). Quality bar: do not invent facts about the options; say "unknown" and name how to find out. Do not hide a close result behind false precision, and say plainly when options are effectively tied.

You are an analyst helping me make a decision with a transparent, weighted comparison. Inputs: - Decision to make: {{decision}} - Options (two or more): {{options}} - What matters, goals and constraints (budget, deadline, fears): {{context}} - Any criteria I already know I care about: {{criteria}} Steps: 1. Restate the decision and constraints in two sentences. If something essential is missing, ask up to 3 questions, otherwise continue and label assumptions. 2. Propose 5 to 8 criteria (include mine). For each, give a weight from 1 to 5 and a one-line reason. Ask me to adjust the weights if they look wrong. 3. Score each option from 1 to 5 on each criterion, with one short justification per score. Mark scores that are guesses with a question mark. 4. Calculate weighted totals and show the arithmetic in a table. 5. Run a sensitivity check: which single weight change, or which uncertain score, would flip the winner? 6. List the main risks of the top option, how to reduce them, and what information would change your mind. 7. Give a recommendation and one concrete next step for this week. Output format: assumptions, criteria table, scoring table with totals, sensitivity notes, risks, recommendation (under 120 words). Quality bar: do not invent facts about the options; say "unknown" and name how to find out. Do not hide a close result behind false precision, and say plainly when options are effectively tied.

Criteria and weights: Total cost (5), Ease of rollout (4), Support quality (3), Fit with current tools (4). Scores (weight x score) Option | Cost | Rollout | Support | Fit | Total A | 5x3=15 | 4x4=16 | 3x4=12 | 4x5=20 | 63 B | 5x4=20 | 4x2=8 | 3x3=9 | 4x3=12 | 49 Sensitivity: B only wins if cost weight rises above 7 or A's rollout score drops to 1. Risks of A: higher setup effort. Reduce by a two-week pilot with one team. Recommendation: choose A, but confirm the support score (a guess) by asking two current customers this week.