one-three-one-rule

This framework turns ambiguous technical choices into a structured format: one problem statement, three option analyses with pros and cons, and a single actionable recommendation with a definition of done and implementation plan.

To compare architecture choices or migration strategies, frame the core decision in a single sentence, evaluate three distinct alternatives with pros and cons, and output a single chosen path with a step-by-step implementation plan and definition of done.

You need structured trade-off analysis for tool selection when multiple viable approaches require comparison. It captures the core decision, evaluates three options with pros and cons, and supplies a single actionable recommendation to reach team consensus quickly.

This decision-making format works for evaluating technical proposals at any scale where multiple viable approaches need comparison, including architecture selection, tool evaluation, and migration strategy planning, by delivering a balanced trade-off presentation.

To generate an actionable recommendation, evaluate three distinct options with pros and cons against a single problem statement, then select one path and define its implementation plan and definition of done to guide execution.

The 1-3-1 options analysis format is limited to evaluating exactly three alternatives, which may constrain scenarios requiring broader exploration or situations where a single actionable recommendation is insufficient for complex, multi-phase technical decisions.