Strategies Command (/goalkit.strategies)

Overview

The Strategies command explores multiple implementation strategies for achieving your defined goals. It encourages considering various approaches before committing to a single implementation path, supporting the Goal-Driven Development principle of flexible strategy exploration.

Purpose

The /goalkit.strategies command is essential for:

• Exploring multiple implementation approaches for each goal
• Evaluating the pros and cons of different strategies
• Assessing implementation difficulty and maintenance complexity
• Comparing strategies against technical feasibility and resource requirements
• Supporting risk assessment and mitigation planning
• Ensuring alignment with team capabilities and preferences

Usage

/goalkit.strategies
Goal: [Reference to specific goal]
Strategy Options:
  Option 1: [Full description of first approach]
    - Pros: [Advantages of this approach]
    - Cons: [Disadvantages of this approach]
    - Implementation Difficulty: [Relative difficulty rating]
    - Maintenance Complexity: [Expected long-term maintenance needs]
  Option 2: [Full description of second approach]
    - Pros: [Advantages of this approach]
    - Cons: [Disadvantages of this approach]
    - Implementation Difficulty: [Relative difficulty rating]
    - Maintenance Complexity: [Expected long-term maintenance needs]
  Option 3: [Full description of third approach]
    - Pros: [Advantages of this approach]
    - Cons: [Disadvantages of this approach]
    - Implementation Difficulty: [Relative difficulty rating]
    - Maintenance Complexity: [Expected long-term maintenance needs]

Evaluation Framework:
- Technical Feasibility
- Resource Requirements
- Time-to-Completion
- Risk Assessment
- Scalability Potential
- Team Alignment

Recommendation: [Your recommended approach with detailed reasoning]

Key Components

Strategy Options

Multiple approaches to achieving the same goal. Each should be described in sufficient detail to allow for meaningful comparison.

Pros and Cons

Balanced analysis of advantages and disadvantages of each approach, considering both technical and non-technical factors.

Implementation Difficulty

Assessment of how challenging each approach would be to implement, considering team skills, technology complexity, and integration requirements.

Maintenance Complexity

Evaluation of the long-term maintenance needs for each approach, including potential for future enhancements, debugging complexity, and dependency management.

Evaluation Framework

Standardized criteria for comparing different strategies across multiple dimensions that matter for the project's success.

Recommendation

A reasoned recommendation for which strategy to pursue, based on the analysis and project-specific priorities.

Best Practices

• Consider at least 2-3 different approaches for each significant goal
• Include both technical and user experience strategies in exploration
• Consider risk mitigation strategies for each approach
• Evaluate strategies against the project timeline and resource constraints
• Consider the team's expertise and preferences when evaluating implementation difficulty
• Think about long-term maintenance and scalability when assessing complexity

Example

/goalkit.strategies
Goal: Implement User Authentication System
Strategy Options:
  Option 1: JWT-based authentication
    - Pros: Stateless, scalable, good for microservices
    - Cons: Token management complexity, security considerations with client storage
    - Implementation Difficulty: Medium
    - Maintenance Complexity: Medium
  Option 2: Session-based authentication
    - Pros: Simpler to implement, server controls state
    - Cons: Requires server-side storage, scaling complexity
    - Implementation Difficulty: Low
    - Maintenance Complexity: Low-Medium
  Option 3: OAuth 2.0 integration
    - Pros: Leverages established providers, reduces password management burden
    - Cons: Third-party dependencies, potential vendor lock-in
    - Implementation Difficulty: Medium-High
    - Maintenance Complexity: Medium

Evaluation Framework:
- Technical Feasibility: All options are technically feasible
- Resource Requirements: OAuth requires most external dependencies
- Time-to-Completion: Session-based would be fastest to implement
- Risk Assessment: JWT has security complexity risks
- Scalability Potential: JWT offers best scalability
- Team Alignment: Team has moderate experience with all approaches

Recommendation: Start with session-based for MVP to validate user needs, then migrate to JWT for production based on scalability needs.

Integration with Goal-Driven Development

The strategies exploration directly supports the Goal-Driven Development principle of flexible strategy exploration. Rather than committing to a single implementation path upfront, this command encourages considering multiple approaches to achieve each goal. This flexibility allows teams to adapt based on learning and changing requirements while maintaining focus on achieving the defined outcomes.