Score new cargo types a port could add alongside ore, from public documents

A port that leaned on one bulk cargo must decide which other trades to pursue. The question is how six candidate cargo types for the Mormugao port compare on criteria you fix in advance, such as land and berth needs, demand nearby and effects on residents, with every score backed by a public document.

• Which six candidate cargoes will you score, and where did you find each one mentioned?
• Which five criteria will you use, and how will you score each before looking at any cargo?
• How will you score effects on nearby residents fairly, using documents from different viewpoints?
• What would make you change the top two?

A sheet with six cargoes against five criteria, a short reason and a page reference in every cell, criteria weights stated openly, a note on the top two, and a line saying which criterion decides the ranking. A reader could trace every score to a document.

Scoring from general knowledge about what ports usually handle. If a score has no document behind it, it is an opinion and the ranking is only as good as your guesses.

• The Mormugao Port Authority's master plan, annual report or public strategy documents
• The state's industrial or logistics policy, and the ports or transport chapter of the state's yearly economic report
• Public documents on community or environmental concerns near the port, such as pollution control board notices or public hearing records
• Your criteria and scoring scale, written before reading

AI must not supply cargo volumes, demand forecasts or claims about the port's plans. Every score comes from a passage you read; where no document speaks to a criterion, the cell says 'no evidence'.

1. 3.1 Fix criteria and scaleCLAUDE CHAT

   Why this tool: Being challenged on criteria before scoring keeps the ranking honest.

   Describe your criteria and scale and ask Claude to find weaknesses. Freeze the list in your sheet before reading any cargo evidence.

   Prompt to copy · fill in the [brackets]Copy

   I am scoring candidate cargo types a port could add alongside iron ore. My criteria are [list criteria] and my scale is [describe scale]. Point out any criterion that overlaps another, any that cannot be scored from public documents, and anything important I have missed, including effects on nearby residents. Do not suggest cargoes.

2. 3.2 Pull the evidence from the documentsCLAUDE WORKING ON YOUR FILES (FORMERLY COWORK)

   Why this tool: Claude working on your files can search several long reports at once and return passages with page numbers.

   Put the downloaded reports in one folder. Ask Claude to list every passage about each candidate cargo and each criterion, with the file and page. Open each passage yourself before using it.

   Prompt to copy · fill in the [brackets]Copy

   Read the reports in this folder. For each of these cargo types, [list six cargoes], list every passage that mentions it, with the file name and page number, and note which of my criteria it relates to: [list criteria]. Quote short passages only. If you find nothing for a cargo, say so. Do not summarise beyond the passages.

   Before you let it act: Check the folder holds only the public documents you chose. Before scoring, open each listed page and confirm the passage exists and says what Claude quoted.

3. 3.3 Score in the sheetGOOGLE SHEETS

   Why this tool: A grid with reasons and page numbers keeps every score traceable.

   Make a row per cargo and a column per criterion, with a score, a one-line reason and a page reference in each cell. Add weights in labelled cells and a weighted total by formula.

4. 3.4 Test the rankingCLAUDE CHAT

   Why this tool: Checking which criterion drives the ranking shows how fragile it is.

   Paste the scores and weights, ask which change would reorder the top two, and test it in your sheet.

   Prompt to copy · fill in the [brackets]Copy

   Here is my scoring of six cargo types for a port, with weights: [paste table]. Which single weight or score change would swap the top two? Which criterion is the ranking most sensitive to? Then argue against my top choice using only the evidence in the table.

5. 3.5 Write the note on the top twoCLAUDE CHAT

   Why this tool: Drafting with the evidence beside you keeps the note grounded.

   Write one page on the top two cargoes, their main evidence and the strongest objection to each, and name what would change your mind.

• Every score cell has a page reference you opened yourself
• Criteria and weights were fixed before scoring and are shown on the sheet
• The resident-effects criterion uses documents from more than one viewpoint
• Recompute one weighted total by hand
• The note names the criterion the ranking depends on most
• Every cell in the table has a source you opened yourself
• Like is compared with like (same period, same unit)

AI tends to score cargoes by what is common at Indian ports in general, and may quote a plausible passage that is not on the page it names. Open every page before you trust a score.

• Criteria and weights fixed in advance
• A folder of public documents with an evidence list
• A scored sheet with reasons and page references
• A sensitivity test of the top two
• A one-page note with objections

The sheet with the top two highlighted, plus a one-page note: the two cargoes, their evidence, the main objection to each and the criterion that decides the ranking.

Explain how you scored community effects fairly and which document changed your mind during the project.