Decision FrameworksSAFE

An agent skill published by revfactory.

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: decision-frameworks
description: "decision-making framework library. framework-designer agent meeting decision-making structure designto do when reference. 'decision-making matrix', 'DACI', 'option assessment' request when usage. However, actual table whensystem decision-making specialist tool building scope outside."
---

# Decision Frameworks — decision-making framework library

framework-designer agent decision-making structure design framework .

## decision-making typeby framework mapping

| decision-making type | also | recommendation framework | quality meeting |
|-------------|--------|---------------|----------|
| specialistday | Low | | 10minute |
| during option optional | duringbetween | during assessment matrix | 30minute decision-making |
| strategyquality direction | High | DACI + scenario | 60minute strategy meeting |
| specialistKRW allocation | High | priority matrix | minutebasis plan |
| risk judgment | High | expected analysis | KRW reporting |

## DACI framework

| role | description | personKRW |
|------|------|------|
| **D**river | decision-making process week also | 1people |
| **A**pprover | final person | 1people |
| **C**ontributor | /information provide | Npeople |
| **I**nformed | result report target | Npeople |

### DACI document template

```markdown
## decision-making: [title]
- deadline: 2025-01-31
- Driver: [name/]
- Approver: [name/]
- Contributors: [name list]
- Informed: [name list]

### background
[ decision neededKorean]

### option
| option | description | advantage | disadvantage | cost | schedule |
|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| A | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| B | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

### plan
[Driver and basis]

### decision
[Approver final decision] — daywhen: ____
```

## during assessment matrix (Weighted Scoring)

### design procedure

```
1. assessment standard (5~7items)
2. duringvalue to do (total 100%)
3. each option standardby 1~5point assessment
4. during score = score × duringvalue
5. totalpoint comparison → point option optional
```

### template

| standard | duringvalue | option A | option B | option C |
|------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| cost | 30% | 4 (1.2) | 3 (0.9) | 5 (1.5) |
| implementation difficulty | 25% | 3 (0.75) | 5 (1.25) | 2 (0.5) |
| strategy qualitynature | 25% | 5 (1.25) | 3 (0.75) | 4 (1.0) |
| risk | 20% | 4 (0.8) | 4 (0.8) | 3 (0.6) |
| **totalpoint** | **100%** | **4.0** | **3.7** | **3.6** |

## 2x2 priority matrix

### Eisenhower matrix

```
 grade
 High Low
 ┌───────────┬───────────┐
│ DO NOW │ SCHEDULE │
│ i.e.when execution │ schedule establish │
 ├───────────┼───────────┤
during│ DELEGATE │ ELIMINATE│
│ │ │
├───────────┴───────────┤
│ │
│ │
 └───────────────────────┘
```

### Impact-Effort matrix

| | capability Low | capability High |
|---|---------|---------|
| ** High** | Quick Win (i.e.when) | Major Project (plan) |
| ** Low** | Fill-in ( when) | Thankless Task (basis) |

## expected analysis (Expected Value)

```
expected = Σ (result × probability)

option A:
 nature(70%): +5000,000 KRW → 3500,000 KRW
 failure(30%): -2000,000 KRW → -600,000 KRW
 expected: +2900,000 KRW

option B:
 nature(90%): +2000,000 KRW → 1800,000 KRW
 failure(10%): -500,000 KRW → -50,000 KRW
 expected: +1750,000 KRW

→ expected standard option A optional
→ However, risk also option B optional (versus loss )
```

## derive method

| method | description | quality situation |
|------|------|----------|
| Fist of Five | 1~5 when tablewhen | confirm |
| Dot Voting | eachspecialist allocation | number option |
| Roman Voting | 👍/👎/✊ when | confirm |
| Gradients of Agreement | 8stage | un-Korean gap |
| Decision Sprint | debate+table | time limitation |

## quality checklist

| item | standard |
|------|------|
| role | DACI or etc. role |
| assessment standard | companybefore done standard 5~7items |
| option number | 2~5items (exceeding when companybefore ) |
| data basis | each option quality basis |
| method | companybefore done method |
| deadline | decision-making person specify |

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

What the source does

Filesystem

none-observed

Network

none-observed

Shell

none-observed

Dependencies

pinned

Secrets in source

none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.