Issue trees

Skill ConrayGambit/Strategy-Consultant-5-Consulting-Frameworks/skills/issue-trees

Tier-1 strategy-consultant frameworks (MECE, Issue Trees, Hypothesis-Driven, Pareto, So What?) packaged as Claude Skills + LLM-agnostic prompts. Drop in any LLM and get whiteboard-style structured analysis. Adapted from Analyst Academy on YouTube.

Install

npx -y skills add ConrayGambit/Strategy-Consultant-5-Consulting-Frameworks --skill issue-trees

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

13 stars13 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Decompose a core problem into root causes with an ASCII tree. Outputs a fenced code block using box-drawing characters. Use for root-cause analysis, drilling from a high-level problem down to testable sub-problems, or step 2 of a strategic analysis.

SKILL.md

3.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Issue Trees

Concept

An issue tree breaks a vague problem into progressively smaller, more concrete sub-problems until you reach something testable. Each branch is a hypothesis about why the parent problem exists. Done well, the leaves are things you can actually go investigate.

Required output format

A fenced code block with text syntax. Use ASCII box-drawing characters:

├── non-final child
│ vertical continuation under a non-final child
└── final child at each level

```text
Core Problem
├── Category 1
│   ├── Sub-factor A
│   └── Sub-factor B
└── Category 2
    └── Sub-factor C
```

Rendering fallback

Some destinations mangle box-drawing characters — Slack, certain email clients, and some chat UIs render them as boxes or question marks. If you know the output is heading to one of those, use an indented-dash tree instead:

- Core Problem
  - Category 1
    - Sub-factor A
    - Sub-factor B
  - Category 2
    - Sub-factor C

It loses some elegance but stays readable everywhere. Default to box-drawing; switch only when needed.

This is "Slack mode." When the user asks for Slack / Teams / email / plain-text output (or names that as the destination), use this indented-dash form for the whole tree by default.

Defaults & flex points

Default	When to flex
At least 2 levels deep	A 1-level tree is a list. Push deeper. For complex problems, 3–4 levels.
3–8 words per node	Stay short — long node text destroys readability.
Branches MECE at each level	This one doesn't flex.
Stop when leaves are testable	A leaf that says "we have problems with customers" isn't done. "Onboarding completion fell to 61%" is.

Example — marketing / conversion

Problem: E-commerce site conversion rate dropped from 3.2% to 1.9% over Q3.

Conversion 3.2% → 1.9%
├── Traffic mix shift
│   ├── Paid social spend redirected to top-of-funnel
│   ├── Branded search share fell
│   └── Affiliate program reduction
├── On-site experience
│   ├── Page-load time +800ms after CDN change
│   ├── New checkout layout shipped Aug 14
│   └── Mobile bounce rate climbing
├── Pricing & promotion
│   ├── Promo cadence reduced (cost-cutting)
│   ├── Free-shipping threshold raised $50 → $75
│   └── Competitor undercutting on top 20 SKUs
└── Inventory & merchandising
    ├── 12 hero SKUs out of stock
    ├── New collection launch delayed two weeks
    └── Recommendation algorithm retrained

Every leaf is concrete. Each one could be assigned to someone with "validate this in 3 days." That's the bar.

Common mistakes

Lazy categories. "Internal" vs. "External" is too coarse. Force specificity.
Mixed levels. All children of a node should be the same kind of thing.
Tree as list. One level deep = bulleted list. Push deeper.
Verbose nodes. Sentences in the tree make it unreadable. Compress.

When to use this skill alone vs. as part of the full analysis

Standalone: when the user has named the problem but needs help decomposing it before going to investigate.
As part of full analysis: strategy-consultant — issue trees are step 2 of 5. If you also want to test which branch is the actual cause, follow up with hypothesis-driven.

Acknowledgment & License

Adapted from Analyst Academy on YouTube — 5 Consulting Frameworks to Solve Any Problem. MIT-licensed; see LICENSE.