Results for “decision-records”

Write Architectural Decision Records following MADR template. Applies Definition of Done criteria, marks gaps for later completion. Use when generating ADR documents from extracted decisions.

An ADR records one decision at the moment it is made, with the information that

Design system architecture, evaluate microservices vs monolith, create architecture diagrams, analyze dependencies, choose databases, and make technical decisions with architecture decision records.

Records daily activities, progress, decisions, and learnings in structured chronological markdown files.

Records decisions and documentation. Use when making architectural decisions, changing public APIs, shipping features, or when you need to record context that future engineers and agents will need to understand the codebase.

Maintains a PARA-structured knowledge base on disk for persistent project context, decisions, and architecture records across agent sessions.

Create and maintain lightweight Architecture Decision Records as agent-readable decision memory — what was decided, why, and which alternatives were rejected. Use when "record this decision", "set up ADRs", "the agent keeps suggesting Y again". Docs vs code drift → plan-docs-sync. Session state → handoff.

Design high-level system architecture, create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), evaluate technology trade-offs, and plan for scalability.

Enforces system design, project structure, dependency management, error handling, testing, and documentation standards at principal-engineer level.

Write and maintain Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) — when to write one, the standard format, status lifecycle, how to link related decisions, and how to surface ADRs in a codebase. Use when asked to "write an ADR", "document this decision", "architecture decision record", "why did we choose X over Y", or "we need a record of this choice". Do NOT use for: general documentation writing — ADRs are specifically for significant architecture decisions.

Define architecture for a Sage/Acorn feature — architecture decision records, component boundaries, data flow, dependency mapping, pre-implementation design, trade-off analysis, Acorn architecture patterns, ADR, design before building

Record decisions with rationale, alternatives, and consequences — the ADR pattern as a primitive. Use when a consequential choice is made — architecture, tooling, process, scope, trade-off. Capture WHY, not just WHAT.

Record a decision: finalized → ADR (optionally rule + guide or spec + plan); open proposal → RFC. Use for 'we decided', 'record this decision', 'make it a standard', 'draft an RFC', 'should we switch to Y'. Not for feature planning or documenting existing code.

【非推奨 → ssot-record を使うこと】 ssot-record に統合済み。/record-decision が呼ばれた場合は ssot-record スキルに処理を委譲する。

Use this skill for README, ADRs, runbooks, changelogs, decision records, operator docs. Trigger when the task involves programming work related to Documentation Adrs, production implementation, audits, debugging, strategy, or validation.

Use when creating, maintaining, or reviewing records of actions, decisions, changes, and events for compliance, accountability, and investigation purposes. This skill provides procedures for managing audit trails across all agent activities.

Decide

Record durable project decisions with rationale, alternatives, assumptions, status, and revisit triggers. Load when the user says record this decision, we decided, decision log, why did we choose, revisit this later, or capture architectural/process rationale.

Decide

Stop re-litigating decisions you already made. Keep a decision record where each entry captures the decision, the context that forced it, the options you weighed, why you chose, and when to revisit, one entry at a time, in plain searchable markdown you can grep later. Trigger on "log this decision", "why did we choose X", "write a decision record", "record why we're doing this", "what did we decide about", or any moment a real call gets made and would otherwise be forgotten.

Audit, write, or revise Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), including the decision of whether one is warranted. Use when an architecturally significant decision needs recording, when reviewing an existing ADR collection, or when adding ADRs to a project that has none. Detects existing template (Nygard or MADR) and defaults to Nygard for new repos. Gates comparison ADRs through a decompose-and-verify interview before drafting.

Logs board meeting decisions with a two-layer memory architecture, separating raw transcripts from approved decisions, and provides commands to review past decisions and overdue action items.

Creates an Architecture Decision Record following the Nygard format to document significant technical decisions, their context, and consequences. Use when making technical choices that affect system architecture, technology selection, or development patterns.

Write a new ADR when a non-trivial or hard-to-reverse decision is made. Use for architecture, workflow, tooling, or policy decisions that should persist in docs/adr.

Structures an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) to capture context, decision, and consequences of significant architectural choices, ensuring decisions are documented with sufficient detail for future teams.

Runs a relentless interview that sharpens a plan or design and creates docs (ADRs and glossary) along the way. Use when the user wants to stress-test a plan or design, or produce decision records.

Police the project's vocabulary — bust vague terms, keep the CONTEXT.md glossary sharp, and lock in decisions worth remembering as ADRs. Use when the user debates naming, says "what should we call this", asks to pin down terminology, wants a decision recorded, or when another skill (hot-seat, whiteboard) surfaces a decision that clears the ADR bar. Just reading the glossary for vocabulary is NOT this skill — trigger only when the words or decisions are being changed.

Captures important product, technical, or founder decisions as durable context with rationale, tradeoffs, and follow-up implications.

Search US federal court opinions, dockets, and judges via CourtListener through an MCP server.

Save the current diagnosis state to disk for cross-session recall, including conclusions, rejected directions, and next steps.