--analyze mode — trade-off tables before each question

Lazy-loaded overlay. Read this file from workflows/discuss-phase.md when --analyze is present in $ARGUMENTS. Combinable with default, --all, --chain, --text, --batch.

Effect

Before presenting each question (or question group, in batch mode), provide a brief trade-off analysis for the decision:

• 2-3 options with pros/cons based on codebase context and common patterns
• A recommended approach with reasoning
• Known pitfalls or constraints from prior phases

Example

**Trade-off analysis: Authentication strategy**

| Approach | Pros | Cons |
|----------|------|------|
| Session cookies | Simple, httpOnly prevents XSS | Requires CSRF protection, sticky sessions |
| JWT (stateless) | Scalable, no server state | Token size, revocation complexity |
| OAuth 2.0 + PKCE | Industry standard for SPAs | More setup, redirect flow UX |

💡 Recommended: OAuth 2.0 + PKCE — your app has social login in requirements (REQ-04) and this aligns with the existing NextAuth setup in `src/lib/auth.ts`.

How should users authenticate?

This gives the user context to make informed decisions without extra prompting.

When --analyze is absent, present questions directly as before (no trade-off table).

Sourcing the analysis

• Pros/cons should reflect the codebase context loaded in scout_codebase and any prior decisions surfaced in load_prior_context.
• The recommendation must explicitly tie to project context (e.g., existing libraries, prior phase decisions, documented requirements).
• If a related ADR or spec is referenced in CONTEXT.md <canonical_refs>, cite it in the recommendation.