Research
Steelman both sides of a decision
Argues each side as its strongest advocate would, so you decide on merits not framing.
Prompt
Decision: {{decision}}
Context: {{context}}
My current leaning: {{leaning}}
Argue BOTH sides as their strongest advocate would — not a balanced summary, two genuine advocates.
For each side: the strongest case, the best evidence, and what the other side gets wrong.
Then:
- The single fact that would most change this decision
- What my current leaning might be blind to
- What you'd need to know that I haven't told you
Argue against my leaning at least as hard as for it.Fill these in
Replace each highlighted variable before sending. Leaving them in place is the most common reason these prompts under-perform.
| Variable | What to put | Example |
|---|---|---|
{{decision}} | The decision | Move from Zapier to self-hosted n8n |
{{context}} | Relevant facts | 3 people, ~20k tasks/month, no ops engineer |
{{leaning}} | What you're inclined to do | Leaning toward migrating |
Tips for better output
- Stating your leaning lets you ask for it to be attacked — the most useful part.
- "The single fact that would most change this" often reveals what to research next.