Fdr

Feature Decision Records (FDRs)

Manage Chatto's features as structured markdown documents in docs/fdr/. Each FDR captures what a feature does from a user perspective and the design decisions that shaped it, with rationale.

What an FDR Is

An FDR is a single source of truth for one feature. It answers:

• What does the feature do, behaviorally? (no implementation details)
• Why is it built this way? (the design decisions, with rationale)
• Where does it fit? (related ADRs, related FDRs, permissions that gate it)

FDRs sit alongside ADRs. The split:

• ADRs are about architectural decisions — cross-cutting choices like "protobuf-first public API" or "per-user encryption keys". Often immutable once decided.
• FDRs are about features — what they do and the design decisions specific to that feature. Updated as the feature evolves.

A single feature may cite several ADRs; a single ADR may underpin several FDRs. That's fine and expected.

What an FDR Is NOT

• NOT a code walkthrough. No function signatures, no proto field tags, no API schema dumps, no KV key patterns, no NATS subject formats.
• NOT a file index. No "Key Files" tables.
• NOT an implementation guide. Agents can grep for those things.
• NOT a changelog. Old design decisions that have been superseded should be rewritten, not appended. The FDR describes the feature today.

If you're writing proto definitions, ConnectRPC handler details, or Go/TypeScript code in an FDR, you're going too deep. Stop and pull back to behavior + rationale.

Directory Structure

docs/fdr/
├── INDEX.md                                # Index with TOC (read this first)
├── FDR-001-roles-and-permissions.md       # Individual FDR
├── FDR-002-replies-and-threads.md
└── ...

File Naming

FDR-{NNN}-{kebab-case-slug}.md

• NNN: Zero-padded three-digit number, sequential
• Slug: Short kebab-case summary (not the full title)

FDR Template

# FDR-{NNN}: {Feature Name}

**Status:** Active
**Last reviewed:** {YYYY-MM-DD}

## Overview

One paragraph: what the feature is, who uses it, and why it exists.

## Behavior

Bullet points describing user-visible behavior. No implementation details.

## Design Decisions

Numbered list. Each entry calls out a non-obvious choice and *why*.

### 1. {Short decision title}

**Decision:** What we chose.
**Why:** The reasoning. Cite an ADR if there is one.
**Tradeoff:** What this costs us.

## Permissions

Permission strings that gate this feature, with one-line descriptions.
Omit this section for features that aren't permission-gated.

## Related

- **ADRs:** ADR-XYZ, ADR-ABC
- **FDRs:** FDR-NNN

## Open Questions

Optional. Known design gaps, future considerations, or things we
deliberately haven't decided yet. Delete this section if there's
nothing to say.

Status values

• Active — feature is in the codebase and supported
• Experimental — feature is in the codebase but unstable
• Retired — feature was removed but the FDR is kept to document the prior design (rare; usually we delete instead)

Workflow

Before doing anything

1. Read docs/fdr/INDEX.md to see the current list of FDRs
2. Only read individual FDR files if relevant to the current task

Creating a new FDR

1. Read docs/fdr/INDEX.md to determine the next available number
2. Use the template above; fill in every required section
3. Set Last reviewed to today's date
4. Add the new entry to docs/fdr/INDEX.md
5. Cross-reference: if the FDR cites an ADR, the ADR doesn't need to be updated — citations flow one direction (FDR → ADR)
6. Sibling check: for each ADR you cite, skim other FDRs that already cite the same ADR. They're likely related to yours and worth listing in your Related → FDRs line.

Updating an FDR

1. Read the FDR
2. Make targeted edits. Don't append "Update: ..." notes — rewrite the affected section so the doc describes the feature today.
3. Bump Last reviewed to today's date
4. If the title changed, update docs/fdr/INDEX.md

Retiring an FDR

When a feature is removed:

• Default: Delete the FDR. Remove the entry from INDEX.md. The git history preserves it if anyone needs to look back.
• Exception: Set status to Retired and keep it only if the prior design is notable and likely to inform future work (e.g., a system that was deliberately rolled back and might be reconsidered). Add a top-level note explaining why it was retired.

Writing Style

• Behavior section: bullet points, short paragraphs. No code blocks. Describe what users see and experience.
• Design Decisions: numbered, with explicit Why + Tradeoff. Each entry should be defensible to a future maintainer who didn't live through the original conversation.
• Mention permission strings (e.g., message.react) — they're part of the feature design. But don't describe how permission checks are implemented.
• Cite ADRs by number when a design decision is downstream of an architectural choice. Don't restate the ADR; just point to it.
• Omit sections that don't add value. A simple feature might just need Overview + Behavior + Permissions. Don't pad.

How To Run

Mode 1: Audit All FDRs (default)

When invoked without arguments, audit every FDR in docs/fdr/ against the codebase.

Mode 2: Audit One FDR

When invoked with a slug (e.g., /fdr reactions), audit only that FDR.

Mode 3: Create a New FDR

When invoked with new <feature-slug> (e.g., /fdr new voice-calls), research the feature and draft a new FDR. Always ask the user to confirm the slug, number, and scope before writing.

Audit Process

For each FDR being audited, launch a dedicated Explore subagent that:

1. Reads the FDR in full
2. Verifies each claim against the codebase:
   • Permission names — do the constants exist in cli/internal/core/permission.go?
   • Behavioral claims — does the code actually work this way?
   • Design Decisions — are the stated rationales still accurate? Has the implementation drifted?
   • Related ADRs/FDRs — do the cited records still exist and still apply?
3. Returns a structured report with:
   • Verified: claims confirmed by code
   • Discrepancies: claims that contradict the code
   • Stale claims: behaviors or decisions that no longer apply
   • Missing: significant user-facing behavior the FDR doesn't mention

Run audits in parallel via the Agent tool when auditing multiple FDRs.

After Auditing

1. Present a summary: which FDRs are clean, which need updates
2. For each discrepancy, propose a concrete edit
3. Only apply updates with user approval — don't silently rewrite
4. If new docs were added or titles changed, update docs/fdr/INDEX.md

Verification Checklist

When auditing or creating an FDR, verify:

• All permission strings exist in cli/internal/core/permission.go
• Permission strings use hyphens, not underscores
• User-facing behaviors match the code
• Design Decisions still reflect the current implementation
• Cited ADRs / FDRs exist and are relevant
• INDEX.md lists this FDR with the correct title

TOC Format (in INDEX.md)

| # | Feature | Status | Last reviewed |
|---|---------|--------|---------------|
| [FDR-001](FDR-001-slug.md) | Title of the feature | Active | 2026-05-19 |