Use for strategic thinking, or when the user must choose a direction under constraints: "where should we focus?", "how do we win?", "roadmap for next year", "what should we not do?". Ends in explicit bets and risks. Skip for step-by-step implementation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Strategy is choosing what not to do as much as what to do. End with explicit bets and guardrails.
Skip: step-by-step implementation detail, or choosing between two concrete options on named criteria.
Win definition: which outcome, by when. Non-goals: what is explicitly out of scope.
Forces that matter: customers, competition, technology, regulation, economics. Use Implication: bullets, not encyclopedic lists. Keep short when information is thin.
Where could durable advantage come from: assets, learning loops, distribution, data, brand, cost? If none is credible, say so and pivot to how to build one.
2-4 genuinely different strategies:
Option: ... - Bet: ... - Cost: ... - Kill signal: ...
Name one primary option (parallel bets only if clearly justified). Say why now and what you are deferring or rejecting.
Top 3 risks with mitigations. Then a near-term focus, a longer-term thesis and a review trigger (a metric or event that forces a rethink). Match the horizons to the domain: 90 days and 12 months suit a business plan; an architecture or career decision may need different spans, so state the spans you chose.
Worked example: references/example.md.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问，或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Use for analytical thinking, or when a question needs breaking down and evidence: "why did metric X drop?", "what drives this?", "break this down", "what data do we need?". Builds a tree, hypotheses and evidence, ends with an answer and key uncertainty. Skip for quick verdicts.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use for creative thinking, or when the user wants many fresh options before choosing: "give me ideas", "brainstorm names", "other ways to do this", "think outside the box". Diverges first, then picks. Skip when one answer is wanted or the task is pure execution.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use for critical thinking, or when the user wants a claim, plan or decision checked for weak spots: "is this right?", "what am I missing?", "poke holes", "sanity check", "devil's advocate", "red team this". Skip for execution-only tasks and wording edits.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use for design thinking, or when a product or service problem needs user understanding before solutions: "what do users really need?", "how might we...", "plan a discovery sprint", "validate this concept". Skip when the spec is frozen or the task is code maintenance.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use for ethical thinking, or when a plan could harm or unfairly burden people: "should we do this?", "is this fair?", "privacy or bias risk", "who gets hurt?". Maps stakeholders, harms, power and consent. Skip for legal advice, neutral fact lookups and implementation-only work.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use for Fermi estimation, or when a rough number is needed fast: "roughly how many...", "ballpark the cost", "estimate capacity or market size", "is this even feasible?". Decomposes, uses ranges and sanity-checks. Skip when exact data is available or a precise calculation is wanted.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。