Decide if you have enough signal to stop researching and act
More research always feels safer, right up until it's just avoidance dressed up as diligence.
- Use it for
- Anyone researching a question who can't tell if they need more data or are just avoiding a decision.
Research can keep expanding indefinitely because more data always feels like it would help, but past a certain point additional research stops changing the answer and starts just delaying a decision that already has enough signal behind it. This prompt checks honestly whether more research would plausibly change the conclusion, or if continuing is really just avoidance.
When not to use this
If you've done genuinely little research so far — one or two data points — this check is premature; you likely do need more before this question is even answerable. This is for when you've accumulated real signal and are unsure if it's enough.
Did this work?
You have an honest, specific answer on whether more research would actually change the decision, or if you already have enough to act.
Tested on claude-opus-5. Evidence status is draft; it moves to battle-tested only on recorded runs, never by hand.