mcpField
M
multi-perspective-analysis

multi-perspective-analysis

github.com/nickcrewAgent workflows6277 installsUpdated 17w ago
Repository

About multi-perspective-analysis

A skill that analyzes complex problems by adopting expert perspectives one at a time, then synthesizing the findings. It is intended for decisions with competing approaches or spanning technical and business domains, without spawning sub-agents.

Key features

  1. 01Sequential expert perspectives
  2. 02Independent analysis and synthesis
  3. 03Dialectical challenge pattern
  4. 04Layered analysis for complex decisions
  5. 05Explicit disagreement and synthesis templates

Use cases

  1. 01Evaluating architectural options
  2. 02Planning across business domains
  3. 03Comparing competing approaches
  4. 04Examining assumptions and trade-offs

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-cortex --skill multi-perspective-analysis

After installing, type/multi-perspective-analysisin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Multi-Perspective Analysis Skill

Adopt multiple expert personas sequentially to analyze complex problems from diverse perspectives, generating insights unavailable from any single viewpoint.

NO SUB-AGENTS

You are a single agent who adopts different expert perspectives one at a time. Do NOT use the Task tool. Do NOT spawn sub-agents, teammates, or parallel workers. Each "expert" is a lens you look through — not a separate process.

The orchestration patterns below describe the ORDER in which you adopt perspectives, not a delegation strategy. "Parallel" means you analyze independently from each perspective before synthesizing — not that multiple agents run simultaneously.

When to Use This Skill

  • Complex architectural decisions requiring diverse expertise
  • Strategic planning needing multiple domain perspectives
  • Problems spanning multiple technical or business domains
  • Decisions with competing valid approaches
  • Situations requiring productive disagreement to find best solutions

Team Assembly Framework

Complexity Scaling
ComplexityPerspectivesStructure
Simple3-4Single pass through each, then synthesize
Moderate5-6Two passes (initial + challenge round), then synthesize
Complex7-9Group into layers, synthesize per layer, then overall
Persona Definition Template
## [Problem Domain] Perspectives

**Mission**: [Clear statement of analysis purpose]

### Perspectives

#### [Expert Title]
**Background**: [Relevant expertise you adopt]
**Domain Vocabulary**: [5-7 key terms to use in this lens]
**Characteristic Question**: "[What this persona always asks]"
**Analytical Lens**: [Unique perspective this persona brings]

Perspective Ordering Patterns

These describe the order in which YOU adopt each perspective. You are one agent switching lenses — not multiple agents running in parallel.

Sequential

Best for: Problems with clear dependency chains

Adopt Perspective A → Adopt Perspective B → Adopt Perspective C → Synthesize
(Each perspective builds on insights from the previous one)
Independent-then-Synthesize

Best for: Problems needing diverse unbiased perspectives

Adopt Perspective A (record findings)
Adopt Perspective B (record findings, don't reference A's)
Adopt Perspective C (record findings, don't reference A's or B's)
→ Synthesize all findings together
Dialectical

Best for: Problems with competing valid approaches

Adopt Perspective A (thesis) → Adopt Perspective B (challenge A's findings)
→ Synthesize the tension into a resolution
Layered

Best for: Complex multi-level decisions

Adopt strategic perspectives (A, B) → synthesize strategic layer
Adopt tactical perspectives (C, D, E) → synthesize tactical layer
Adopt operational perspectives (F, G) → synthesize operational layer
→ Final synthesis across all layers

Voice Differentiation Guidelines

Each expert maintains distinct:

  • Vocabulary: 10-15 domain-specific terms
  • Questions: 2-3 signature questions they always ask
  • Metaphors: Teaching analogies from their field
  • Reasoning: Characteristic analytical patterns

Per-Perspective Output Template

### [Expert Title] Perspective

Adopting the lens of a [role], I notice...

**Key Insight**: [Primary contribution from this perspective]
**Trade-off Identified**: [What this view reveals about tensions]
**Recommendation**: [Actionable guidance from this expertise]
**Next Question**: [What this reveals we should explore]

Disagreement Protocol

Intensity Levels
  1. Gentle (refinement-focused)

    • "This approach has merit, but what if..."
    • Edge case identification, optimization suggestions
  2. Systematic (methodology-challenging)

    • "While the goal is sound, I question whether..."
    • Alternative framework proposals, evidence evaluation
  3. Rigorous (premise-challenging)

    • "I fundamentally question whether we're solving the right problem..."
    • Paradigm alternatives, success criteria redefinition
  4. Paradigmatic (worldview-challenging)

    • "What if everything we think we know is wrong?"
    • Revolutionary approaches, constraint elimination

Synthesis Template

## Multi-Perspective Synthesis

### Convergent Insights
[Where experts agree and why this matters]

### Creative Tensions
[Where perspectives productively differ]
- Tension 1: [Expert A] vs [Expert B] on [issue]
- Resolution approach: [How to honor both]

### Integrated Solution
[Unified approach that honors multiple viewpoints]

### Emergent Discoveries
[Insights that emerged only from combining perspectives]

### Implementation Path
1. [First action]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]

Success Indicators

  • Insights that only emerged from combining multiple perspectives
  • Assumptions challenged and resolved into better solutions
  • Distinct voice and vocabulary for each adopted perspective
  • Productive tensions resolved into robust outcomes
  • Clear actionable recommendations with trade-off awareness

Comments

Markdown supported