sxsphinxstack

Skills / Decide with data

Decide with data

Build an honest comparison for one real decision. Criteria the person chose, weights, data per option, and what the numbers cannot settle. Use when they are stuck between options or ask "help me decide".

Use this skill. Nothing to install.

Open in ChatGPT Open in Claude prefilled and ready; just hit send
for Gemini, Copilot, or Cursor: paste it, then say "use the decide with data skill"

Don't have an agent?  ·  Raw file: skills/decide-with-data.md

Watch the first two minutes

This is how a decision session goes, including the moment most people try to cheat. Click through it.

(pastes the skill) help me decide between two laptops. i've been stuck for three weeks
Happy to, with one thing stated up front: the sheet we build organizes the decision and exposes your hidden assumptions. It will not make the choice, and a spreadsheet that claims to is lying.
fine. so i list the specs?
You list your criteria, which is different. What would make you regret this purchase in a year? And what are you quietly already deciding on?
honestly: price, battery, weight, and whether it runs my games
Those four, each with a direction and a unit. Then real numbers per cell: today's actual prices, published battery tests, a benchmark for your specific games, with a source noted beside each. And you set the weights before you see any totals. That order is what keeps the sheet honest.
done. A wins 7.7 to 7.2... but i wanted B. can i bump the gaming weight?
You just learned something better than the total: you want B. We also stress-tested the weights, and B does win if gaming matters even a bit more than you first said. So the write-up says exactly that, and the last inch of the decision stays yours.

Scripted example of a real session.

Can't I just nudge the weights until my favorite wins?

You can, and the skill watches for it. Nudging weights after seeing totals is called score-fitting, and when it happens the agent names it kindly, because it is a legitimate result: the sheet just told you which option you actually want. That gets written down as the finding instead of being laundered through fake weights. The protections are structural: weights are set before totals are visible, every formula is inspectable, and a sensitivity check shows whether the winner survives moving the biggest weight up and down. Decision-shaped projects, if you want practice on a smaller stake:

Same keyboard, versus Which bus is actually faster Commute experiment

What you end up with

A comparison sheet you can defend cell by cell, and a half-page recommendation in your own words. Here is the laptop version.

Example
LAPTOP DECISION
options as rows, criteria as columns, sources noted per number
SCORED COMPARISON 1
criterion   wt   A (Zephyr 14)     B (Swift X)
price       35   $1,049 -> 8.1     $1,299 -> 6.6
battery     25   9.5 h  -> 7.0     11.2 h -> 9.0
weight      15   1.6 kg -> 8.0     1.4 kg -> 9.3
my games    25   58 fps -> 9.0     41 fps -> 6.5
WEIGHTED TOTAL   7.7               7.2
sources: retailer prices 5/12, published battery test, benchmark video for both chips 2
SENSITIVITY CHECK 3
Raising "my games" from 25 to 35 flips the winner to B (7.6 vs 7.5). The options are genuinely close on my stated weights.
RECOMMENDATION  ·  HALF PAGE 4
"A wins by 0.5 on the weights I set before seeing totals, but the ranking flips on a small nudge to gaming, so the numbers call this close. What the sheet cannot settle: B's keyboard felt better in the store, and that matters daily. I'm taking a week to try A's keyboard in person; if it's fine, A."
  1. Normalized so units stop mattering. Each column maps to a 0 to 10 score with the direction flipped where lower is better, in formulas you can inspect.
  2. Every number has a source or a label. Measured facts cite where they came from; subjective calls like "I like the campus" get scored 1 to 5 and marked as judgment. Both belong in the sheet, labeled as what they are.
  3. The stress test is the honest part. A winner that survives weight nudges means a robust decision; a winner that flips means the options are close and the sheet has hit its limit. Either answer is progress.
  4. The write-up names what never fit in a column. Gut feel about people, family factors, fear of missing out. Saying what the sheet excludes is what makes the rest of it trustworthy.

Questions people actually ask

Will the sheet tell me what to choose?

No, and the skill says so in its first breath. It organizes the options, exposes hidden assumptions, and shows how robust the ranking is. The final call stays yours, including everything that never fit in a column.

What if the totals come out nearly tied?

Then the finding is "either is defensible; decide on the unquantified part", and that is a successful analysis. Knowing the options are genuinely close ends the agonizing over which spec sheet to reread.

What counts as a criterion?

Whatever you would regret ignoring in a year, in your words. Five to eight of them, each with a direction and a unit, and overlapping ones get merged because two criteria measuring the same thing act as a hidden double weight.

Some things I can't put a number on.

They still go in. Genuinely subjective criteria get a 1 to 5 score labeled as your judgment, and whatever resists even that goes in the write-up as a named factor the numbers could not settle.

Does this work for big decisions like college?

Yes, with real tuition and aid figures rather than sticker prices, and "do nothing" or "gap year" in the sheet as a real option with its own row. For the major itself, choose-a-major-with-data goes deeper.

Where to go from here

Decision made? Adjacent skills that use the same muscles:

Chart the truth Choose a major with data Budget basics

Thin on data for your options? Go collect some:

Run a survey Track anything Beat the forecast
Curious? Read the full skill — the exact instructions your agent gets
---
name: decide-with-data
category: data
description: Build an honest comparison for one real decision. Criteria the person chose, weights, data per option, and what the numbers cannot settle. Use when they are stuck between options or ask "help me decide".
---

# decide-with-data

Help someone decide something real that they are actually
facing right now, with money or months at stake: which college,
phone, laptop, job offer, apartment, plan. The product is a
comparison sheet plus a short decision memo in the person's words. Be straight
about the limit up front: the sheet organizes the decision and
exposes hidden assumptions; it does not make the decision, and a
spreadsheet that claims to is lying.

This skill supports a decision; it does not replace qualified medical, legal,
tax, investment, or other regulated advice. For a high-stakes decision, use
current official sources, record uncertainty, and route professional questions
to an appropriate expert. The person chooses and owns the conclusion.

## Frame it

Get the real option list — usually two to five. If one "option" is
"do nothing", it goes in the sheet too; it has costs and scores like
the rest. Then criteria, theirs and not a template's: ask what would
make them regret a choice in a year, and what they are quietly
already deciding on. Five to eight criteria; merge overlapping ones,
because two criteria measuring the same thing is a hidden double
weight. Each criterion needs a stated direction (cost: lower is
better) and a unit or scale.

## Fill it with real data

Options as rows, criteria as columns. For each cell, find the actual
number: real tuition and aid figures, real commute time from the
maps app, real battery benchmarks, the actual salary and hours from
the offer. Keep a `sources` column or note per number. Some criteria
are genuinely subjective ("I like the campus") — score those 1–5,
but mark them as their judgment, not measurement; both belong in
the sheet, labeled as what they are. Where a number is unknown,
leave it visibly blank and note what finding it would take. A blank
cell is often the output: it tells them which phone call to make
before deciding.

## Weight and score

- Normalize each column to a 0–10 score so units stop mattering;
  flip the direction for lower-is-better columns. Do the arithmetic
  in formulas they can inspect.
- They set weights before seeing totals, by asking which criterion
  would win a head-to-head trade-off. Weights sum to 100.
- Compute the weighted total per option. Then the important step:
  stress-test it. Shift the biggest weight up and down and watch
  whether the winner changes. A winner that survives says the
  decision is robust; a winner that flips on a small nudge says the
  options are genuinely close and the sheet has hit its limit.
- Watch for score-fitting: if they nudge weights until the option
  they secretly wanted wins, name it kindly — the sheet just told
  them their answer, and that is a legitimate result. Write it down
  as such instead of laundering it through fake weights.

## Say what the numbers cannot

Finish with a half-page in their words: the top option, the margin,
what the ranking was sensitive to, and the criteria that never fit
in a column — gut feel about people, fear of missing out, family
factors. Naming what the sheet excludes is what makes the rest of it
honest. If the totals are within noise of each other, the finding is
"either is defensible; decide on the unquantified part" — that is a
successful analysis, and worth saying plainly.

## Done

- A comparison sheet: real options, their criteria, sourced numbers,
  subjective scores labeled as such, inspectable formulas
- Weights they set before seeing results, plus a sensitivity check
- A half-page decision memo stating the person's choice or remaining options,
  the margin, sensitivity, and what the numbers could not settle
- They can defend any cell out loud, source or judgment

Then: chart-the-truth if the comparison deserves one chart to show
the person they share the decision with.