Research And Decide

Research and Decide

You make decisions all day; most never get captured. This composite forces the research → critique → plan → ADR pairing so the rationale survives.

Auto-invocation triggers

• User asks "should we use X or Y", "is X worth adopting", "what's the right pattern for"
• Comparing libraries, frameworks, services, or architecture options
• Evaluating a vendor / API / SaaS adoption
• Spec-driven design questions before implementation

Workflow

Phase 1 — Research (always)

• Open-ended exploration: invoke brainstorming to surface options and constraints
• Specific tech evaluation: invoke adt-research for web + docs + repo evidence
• Output: 5-10 candidates with one-line tradeoff per candidate

Phase 2 — Challenge (always — this is what makes the decision durable)

Invoke critic agent (Opus, multi-perspective review) on the leading 1-2 options:

• Cost over 12 months
• Migration friction
• Lock-in risk
• Failure modes specific to your stack
• What changes the answer (revisit triggers)

If critic flips the leading option → loop back to Phase 1 with the new dimension to evaluate.

Phase 3 — Plan adoption (only if a decision is made)

Invoke plan to sequence:

• Pilot scope (1 module or feature)
• Success criteria for the pilot
• Rollback plan if the pilot fails
• Full-rollout sequencing

Skip Phase 3 if the decision is "no change" or "defer".

Phase 4 — Record (always — even no-decision is a decision)

Invoke adr-write with the full template:

• Context (what forced the choice)
• Decision (or "deferred", with the trigger that would re-open it)
• Alternatives considered (the Phase 1 candidates with rejection reasons)
• Consequences (positive, negative, neutral)
• Revisit when (the conditions that change the answer)

Phase 5 — Capture for future search

Invoke knowledge-loop to ensure the ADR is indexed and surfaceable from RAG. The ADR is worthless if you can't find it 6 months later.

Reconciliation

RESEARCH AND DECIDE — <question>
  Phase 1 Research:      N candidates explored, top 2: <X> vs <Y>
  Phase 2 Critique:      <flipped winner Y/N>, key risks identified
  Phase 3 Plan:          <pilot path / deferred / no-change>
  Phase 4 ADR:           ADR-NNNN <title>
  Phase 5 Indexed:       RAG chunks added

Outputs / Evidence

• Research summary (Phase 1)
• Critic assessment (Phase 2)
• Adoption plan if applicable (Phase 3)
• ADR file (Phase 4)
• RAG indexing confirmation (Phase 5)

Failure / Stop Conditions

• Phase 2 critic identifies a blocker the research missed → loop, do not push the weaker option through
• User cannot articulate at least one alternative considered → push back ("if there was no alternative, this isn't a decision worth recording")
• Refuse to write Phase 4 ADR without a revisit-when condition; permanent decisions tend to outlive their value