# Rfc Template

> Structures a Request for Comments (RFC) document for proposing significant technical changes that require cross-team input and approval, guiding authors through problem definition, proposed solution, alternatives analysis, and rollout planning.

- Skill: `cloudthinker-ai/rfc-template` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add cloudthinker-ai/rfc-template`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/cloudthinker-ai/rfc-template/raw
- Safety review: PASS (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Docs & Writing, Coding & Dev Tools, Technical Writing
- Tags: Documentation, Rfc, Technical Writing, Template
- Author: cloudthinker-ai (https://skillmd.com/u/cloudthinker-ai)
- Updated: 2026-08-22
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/cloudthinker-ai/rfc-template

---


# Request for Comments (RFC)

## Phase 1: Problem Statement

Define the problem clearly and concisely.

1. - [ ] What is the current state?
2. - [ ] What is the problem or opportunity?
3. - [ ] Who is affected?
4. - [ ] What is the cost of inaction?
5. - [ ] What are the success criteria for a solution?

**Metadata:**

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| RFC Number | |
| Title | |
| Author | |
| Status | Draft / Open for Comment / Final Comment Period / Accepted / Rejected |
| Created | |
| Comment Deadline | |
| Reviewers | |

## Phase 2: Proposed Solution

Describe the proposed approach in detail.

1. - [ ] High-level overview (1-2 paragraphs)
2. - [ ] Detailed technical design
3. - [ ] Architecture diagrams
4. - [ ] API changes or new APIs
5. - [ ] Data model changes
6. - [ ] User experience changes

**Scope:**

- [ ] What is in scope for this RFC
- [ ] What is explicitly out of scope
- [ ] What are the dependencies

## Phase 3: Alternatives Considered

| Alternative | Description | Why Not Chosen |
|------------|------------|----------------|
|            |            |                |

For each alternative:
- [ ] Describe the approach
- [ ] List advantages over the proposed solution
- [ ] List disadvantages compared to the proposed solution

## Phase 4: Impact Analysis

**Compatibility:**
- [ ] Backward compatible: Y/N
- [ ] Migration required: Y/N
- [ ] Breaking changes: list

**Performance:**
- [ ] Expected performance impact
- [ ] Benchmarks or estimates

**Security:**
- [ ] Security implications
- [ ] New attack surfaces

**Cost:**
- [ ] Infrastructure cost changes
- [ ] Engineering effort estimate
- [ ] Ongoing maintenance cost

**Risk Assessment:**

| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
|      |           |        |            |

## Phase 5: Rollout Plan

1. - [ ] Phase 1: ___ (description, timeline, success criteria)
2. - [ ] Phase 2: ___ (description, timeline, success criteria)
3. - [ ] Phase 3: ___ (description, timeline, success criteria)

- [ ] Rollback plan
- [ ] Feature flag strategy
- [ ] Monitoring and validation approach

## Phase 6: Open Questions

| Question | Raised By | Status | Resolution |
|----------|-----------|--------|------------|
|          |           |        |            |

## Counter-Rationalizations

| Shortcut | Counter | Why |
|----------|---------|-----|
| "We can skip some steps for this case" | Adapt the workflow steps, don't skip them | Skipped steps are where incidents and oversights originate |
| "The user seems to already know what to do" | Complete all workflow phases with the user | The workflow catches blind spots that experience alone misses |
| "This is a minor case, full process is overkill" | Scale the process down, don't turn it off | Minor cases become major when unstructured; the process scales, not disappears |
| "I'll fill in the details later" | Complete each section before moving on | Deferred details are forgotten; real-time capture is more accurate |
| "The template output isn't necessary" | Always produce the structured output format | Structured output enables comparison, audit trails, and handoff to other teams |

## Output Format

### RFC Summary

- **RFC:** ___
- **Title:** ___
- **Status:** ___
- **Decision:** Accepted / Rejected / Deferred
- **Decision Date:** ___
- **Decision Rationale:** ___

### Action Items

- [ ] Address all open questions
- [ ] Incorporate reviewer feedback
- [ ] Create implementation plan and tickets
- [ ] Schedule kickoff for implementation
- [ ] Archive RFC in decision log