/omh-decide

name: "omh-decide"
description: "[omh] Team or business decision between options: tradeoffs, a recommendation, and a decision note you can act on. Use when the user says: strategy-brief, strategy brief, strategy memo, product strategy, strategic options, decision note, leadership strategy, next strategy."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, strategy]
    category: strategy
    phase: brief
    role: operator
    quality_tier: decision-gated

Strategy Brief

This is a Hermes-native `strategy-brief` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`strategy-brief` exists to keep `strategy` work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.

Do Not Use When

• The strategic question is whether an early idea's customer problem and segment are real, and no validated discovery receipt exists yet; use `product-discovery-validation`.
• The question is how to run a hiring process — scorecards, interview loops, candidate comparison — rather than whether to hire at all; use `people-ops`.
• The user wants Jev's typed probabilities for a yes/no, pick-one, or scored question over supplied text rather than tradeoffs and a recommendation; use `jev-ask`.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: strategy-brief: decide whether our onboarding should prioritize solo founders or enterprise buyers.
• Expected behavior: Frame options, tradeoffs, assumptions, rejected paths, and the decision evidence needed.
• Why: The request is strategy-shaped and should not jump directly into implementation.

Bad example:

• Prompt: strategy-brief: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
• Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing `strategy-brief`.
• Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.

Completion Checklist

• The decision, options, tradeoffs, assumptions, and rejected alternatives are named.
• Observed signals are separated from strategic inference.
• Accepted decisions and implementation follow-ups are not conflated.

Recovery Notes

• If evidence is mostly assumption, label it and recommend a research or feedback-triage pass.
• If the decision owner is missing, keep the output as options rather than accepted strategy.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Research and company ops** (`product-docs`, `source-finder`, `web-research`, `research`, `model-optimization`, `inference-serving`, `model-finetuning`, `research-brief`, `+20 more`) - research, signals, ops, and briefings.
• If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
• Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.

Use When

Use when Hermes should turn goals and evidence into options, tradeoffs, recommendations, and a decision-ready brief.

Strong routing signals: `strategy-brief`, `strategy brief`, `strategy memo`, `product strategy`, `strategic options`, `decision note`, `leadership strategy`, `next strategy`, `capacity planning`, `hire or outsource`, `outsource or hire`, `cut scope`, `headcount plan`, `demand versus capacity`, `다음 전략`, `전략 정리`, `전략 메모`, `전략 옵션`, `의사결정`, `리더십 회의`

Catalog Metadata

Category: `strategy` Phase: `brief` Hermes role: `operator` Quality tier: `decision-gated` Reasoning demand: `standard`

Quality bar:

• Name the decision, constraints, options, tradeoffs, and rejected alternatives.
• Tie recommendations to observed evidence or mark them as assumptions.
• Keep coding handoff disabled until strategy is accepted and code work is explicit.
• When the decision is a resourcing one — hire, outsource, or cut scope — quantify demand and capacity against each other in one unit before comparing options, and price each option with the lag before it lands; a gap that exists this quarter is not closed by a hire that ramps next quarter. The worked example is `omh-decide/references/capacity-planning.md`.
• Ask whether the decision deserves a durable record - hard to reverse, surprising without its context, and carrying a real trade-off; all three or no record, a decision note in chat is enough.
• When a record is warranted, draft it per `omh-decide/references/decision-records.md` - the `docs/adr/` convention with Context, Drivers, Considered Options, Decision, Consequences with mitigations, and Related - and stop for the user's approval before any file is written.
• Never edit an accepted record: status moves Proposed to Accepted to Deprecated or Superseded, supersession is a new record pointing back at the old one, and a Rejected record is kept - it is what `decision-recall` reads later.

Handoff policy:

Keep strategy synthesis in Hermes; do not create implementation handoff until a decision is accepted and code work is explicit.

Required inputs:

• goal
• known evidence
• constraints
• decision owner

Expected outputs:

• options
• tradeoffs
• recommended direction
• decision note

Artifact expectations:

• strategy brief or decision note when a wrapper captures it

Safety rules:

• Do not treat a draft recommendation as an accepted decision.
• Keep unresolved assumptions visible.
• Separate strategy from implementation planning unless the user asks for execution.
• A drafted decision record stays a proposal: nothing is written under `docs/adr/` until the user approves the write.

Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: `strategy-synthesis`.

omh runtime record --skill strategy-brief --harness strategy-synthesis --status started

Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`. Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.

• Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes.

Preserve workflow intent and stop con