one-three-one-rule

Structure technical trade-offs for architecture decisions by condensing the problem into one sentence, comparing exactly three options with pros and cons, and selecting one recommendation with an aligned Definition of Done and implementation plan.

The 1-3-1 rule for decision-making in technical proposals is a structured format requiring one problem statement, three options with pros and cons, and a single recommendation with an implementation plan and Definition of Done.

Present tool selection trade-offs to stakeholders clearly by framing exactly one problem sentence, providing three distinct options with explicit pros and cons, and delivering one actionable recommendation with a concrete implementation plan.

Yes, you can use this decision-making format for refactoring or migration planning. It applies to any technical proposal requiring stakeholder-ready trade-off communication by producing a single problem statement, three options, and one recommendation with a Definition of Done.

Write a Definition of Done for an architecture recommendation by aligning it directly with your selected option from the three-option comparison and pairing it with a concrete implementation plan to ensure measurable completion criteria.

You should not use the 1-3-1 format for technical proposals when a decision lacks multiple competing approaches or meaningful trade-offs, as the structure strictly requires exactly three distinct options with pros and cons to be effective.