MiroFish is scenario planning software for decisions where actors, relationships, timing, and interpretation matter. Upload a focused source packet, inspect the scenario graph, run simulation rounds, read the prediction report, and ask follow-up questions before turning uncertainty into real validation work. The workflow is built for strategic rehearsal, not automated certainty.
Live decision rehearsal
Multi-role reaction path
Direct answers
Start with the evidence needed for the decision. Use simulation to expose uncertainty, not to hide it behind generated volume.
It helps teams structure uncertainty, compare plausible paths, inspect assumptions, and prepare decisions before external events make changes expensive.
MiroFish fits when a scenario depends on actors interpreting and reacting to a decision, not just numeric inputs in a spreadsheet.
Validate the claims that would change the decision, including actor assumptions, evidence gaps, timing risks, and response options.
Five-step workflow
Every step leaves something inspectable: the source, the actor assumptions, the reaction path, or the next human check.
Provide the decision packet, context, actors, constraints, and assumptions.
Review nodes, relationships, knowledge, conflicts, and missing actors before simulation.
Let actors respond across time and observe second-order paths.
Review the narrative, pressure points, likely paths, and evidence gaps.
Question assumptions, winners, risks, weak evidence, and next validation steps.
Useful output makes the next decision or validation step more specific.
These boundaries apply even when the output looks detailed or consistent.
Frequently asked questions
No. MiroFish can prepare and stress-test scenario thinking by turning source material into a graph, simulation rounds, a report, and follow-up questions, but accountable planning remains human.
Use a focused source packet: decision memo, market context, product or policy brief, competitor evidence, stakeholder notes, constraints, assumptions, and the question to test.
The graph makes actors, relationships, knowledge, constraints, and pressure points visible before the report becomes persuasive, so teams can review assumptions earlier.
Use follow-up questions to inspect why the report reached a conclusion, which actors matter, what evidence is weak, and which real-world checks should come next.
Bring the current evidence, a bounded question, and the assumptions your team is willing to challenge.
Related methods and scenarios
Compare strategic scenarios through evidence-grounded actors, assumptions, reaction paths, and review tasks.
Compare spreadsheets, workshops, forecasting models, and AI simulation tools for scenario planning.
Explore strategic futures and assumptions before running focused scenario simulations.
