mecelisted

## Why this exists, and what I'd change **Why it exists.** Most breakdowns silently double-count or miss a bucket. PMs list "options" or "user segments" without checking that the buckets don't overlap and together cover everything. MECE forces both checks explicitly, every time. **Design tradeoffs.** - **Five-step check instead of a gut test.** Name the parent, ME test, CE test, math test, exclusion test. Cost: feels procedural for trivial lists. Skip it when there are only two buckets. - **Pre-built MECE structures (user lifecycle, revenue drivers, etc.) are presented as defaults.** Cost: biases toward known patterns. A novel domain may need a fresh structure, and the defaults can blind you to it. - **Linked as a "check" into other skills, not enforced.** I made the integration a hint inside `/decision-doc`, `/impact-sizing`, and `/prd-draft`, rather than a gate. Cost: it gets skipped when people are in a rush, which is exactly when they need it most. **What I'd change.** Auto-invoke the MECE check silently inside `/decision-doc`, `/impact-sizing`, and `/prd-draft`. Output the MECE result alongside the main artifact, so the structuring discipline happens whether or not the PM remembered. --- # MECE Problem-Solving Framework MECE is McKinsey's method for structuring any problem so your analysis has no gaps and no double-counting. **Two rules:** - **Mutually Exclusive (ME):** Each item fits in exactly one bucket. No overlap. - **Collectively Exhaustive (CE):** All bucke