/scout -- Navigate a Strategic Tension

Argument hint: <tension, decision, or strategic question>

---

Philosophy

Strategic thinking begins with tension, not solution. The quality of your routes is determined by the quality of your questions. A scout doesn't recommend -- it reveals the landscape so the user can choose with clarity.

---

Workflow

Step 1: Surface the Tension

Ask the user to describe the tension. Accept any form:

• A binary decision: "Should we X or Y?"
• A strategic question: "How should we approach Z?"
• A feeling of being stuck: "Something isn't right about our Q direction."

Help articulate the tension as a clean statement: "The tension is between [A] and [B]."

If the user provides a clear tension in their argument, acknowledge it and move to Step 2. Do not over-interrogate when the tension is obvious.

Step 2: Gather Context

If ~~knowledge base is connected, search for prior strategic documents, decision records, or retrospectives related to this tension.

Ask the user for any additional context:

• What has been tried before?
• What constraints exist (time, budget, team size)?
• Who are the stakeholders?

Conclude context gathering when you have enough to scout meaningfully. Don't delay scouting for perfect information.

Step 3: Scout 3-5 Routes

Generate 3-5 distinct routes. Each route is a complete strategic direction, not a minor variation. For each route, define:

Field	Description
Name	A memorable, descriptive title
Thesis	One sentence explaining the core idea
Risk	What could go wrong
Impact	What this enables if successful
Duration	Rough timeline estimate
Optimizes for	What this route prioritizes
Sacrifices	What this route gives up

Present routes as a table. Do NOT recommend one. Ask the user:

"Which of these routes resonate? Which feel wrong? Did any spark a new idea?"

Step 4: Listen and Synthesize

After user feedback:

1. Note which routes resonated and why
2. Note which routes felt wrong and why
3. Look for connections between what resonated
4. Listen for reframes -- did the user's reaction reveal a deeper question?

If a reframe emerges, name it explicitly and consider re-scouting with the new lens (see the iterative-scouting skill).

If no reframe emerges, synthesize a hybrid direction that incorporates what resonated. Give the synthesized direction a memorable name.

Step 5: Produce the Strategic Decision Document

Create a markdown document with these sections:

# Strategic Scout: [Topic]

**Date:** [date]
**Tension:** [tension statement]

## Routes Explored

[Table of all routes with Name, Thesis, Risk, Impact, Optimizes For, Sacrifices]

## What We Heard

[Summary of user feedback -- what resonated, what didn't, any reframes]

## Synthesized Direction: [Name]

[Description of the hybrid/refined direction with rationale]

## Next Steps

[3-5 concrete next steps to move from strategy to action]

## Open Questions

[Any unresolved questions that need further exploration]

Save the file as [date]_strategic_scout_[topic].md.

---

Quality Gate

Before delivering, verify:

• The tension is clearly articulated as a statement, not a solution
• At least 3 distinct routes are presented (never fewer)
• Each route has a name, thesis, tradeoffs, and what it optimizes/sacrifices
• Routes are presented without recommendation -- the user chose what resonated
• User feedback was gathered before synthesizing
• The synthesized direction has a name and clear rationale
• The output is saved as a dated markdown file
• Next steps are concrete and actionable

---

Output

A strategic decision document saved as:

[date]_strategic_scout_[topic].md