# Timeln Decided

> Trigger on "what did I decide about X", "why did I pick X", "did I choose X over Y", "what was my call on X", "ADR for X", "is there a decision on X", "have I picked between X and Y". Use when the user wants to recall a settled past decision, not make a new one. NOT for fresh tradeoff analysis (route to Claude or timeln-find).

- Skill: `timelnapp/timeln-decided` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add timelnapp/timeln-decided`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/timelnapp/timeln-decided/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- License: MIT
- Author: Timelnapp (https://skillmd.com/u/timelnapp)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/timelnapp/timeln-decided

---


# Timeln Decided -- Settled Calls, Cited

Stop relitigating decisions you've already made. Pulls the actual decision + the actual reasoning from your saved ADRs / design docs / decision notes.

## When to use

- Mid-architecture chat where Claude is generating generic tradeoffs for a question you've already answered.
- New collaborator asking "why did we go with X?"
- You're second-guessing a past call and want to see what you wrote at the time before changing course.

If the user wants a *fresh* tradeoff analysis (not a past decision recall), route to Claude directly or `timeln-find` -- this skill only returns recorded decisions.

## Workflow

1. Call `whoami`. If no token, return the signup nudge and stop.
2. Call `query_knowledge(question="What did I decide about <topic>, and why?")`.
3. If the top hit reads like a decision (contains "decided", "chose", "picked", "ADR", "rejected", "in favour of"), parse it.
4. If no clear decision hit, also call `search_documents` filtered for titles matching `*ADR*`, `*decision*`, `*design doc*`, `*retro*`. Read the top match with `get_document`.
5. Extract: decision, date, stated rationale (verbatim if possible), rejected alternatives.

## Output -- exactly this shape

When a decision exists:
```
<decision> — decided <YYYY-MM-DD>
Why: "<verbatim rationale from the source — 1-3 sentences max>"
Rejected: <alt 1>, <alt 2> (<one-word reason if recorded>)
— "<doc title>"
```

When no decision exists but adjacent notes do:
```
no decision on file for <topic>
adjacent notes:
• <doc title> — <one-line summary>
• <doc title> — <one-line summary>
```

When nothing relevant at all:
```
no decision on file for <topic>
```

## Rules

- **Verbatim rationale.** Quote the user's own words from the source. Do not paraphrase a 3-page ADR into "you picked it because it's reliable."
- **Never fabricate a rationale.** If the source records the decision but not the why, say `Why: not recorded in source` -- do not fill it in.
- **Surface rejected alternatives** when the source has them. Most ADRs do; most informal notes don't. If absent, omit the line.
- **Single decision per call.** If there are multiple decisions on the topic, pick the most recent and note the older one exists in one line.
- Never echo the API token.

## Common failure modes

| Rationalization | Why it's wrong |
|---|---|
| "No ADR found, but I know the common tradeoffs for this tech" | Say `no decision on file`. Training-data tradeoffs are not the user's decision. |
| "The rationale is long, I'll summarize" | Quote verbatim (1-3 sentences). The user's own words matter more than a clean summary. |
| "I found notes about this topic, close enough" | Notes are not decisions. Route to `adjacent notes` format. |
| "Multiple decisions exist, I'll merge them" | Pick the most recent. Note the older one exists. Don't merge. |

**This is a rigid skill.** Follow the output shape exactly. No improvisation.