arch-adr-writer

Document architecture decisions by capturing the topic, context, drivers, options, and consequences to generate a structured ADR. This process improves project traceability and governance by linking the final decision to its underlying rationale.

You need an Architecture Decision Record during design reviews or governance workflows when a technical choice has significant consequences. It captures the context and alternatives evaluated, ensuring future teams understand why a specific architecture was chosen.

Link ADRs to requirements and user stories by providing these artifacts as optional inputs during document generation. The output connects the architecture decision directly to relevant project narratives and governance artifacts for full traceability.

Yes, you can update an existing ADR corpus by supplying prior ADRs, new requirements, and risks as inputs. The workflow integrates this new context to maintain a living document that reflects the latest architectural governance state.

The best way to capture architecture rationale is to evaluate documented alternatives against stated drivers and risks. This produces a comprehensive decision record that explicitly outlines the chosen path and its linked consequences.

A complete ADR requires a decision topic as the primary input, while optional inputs include requirements, risks, and existing ADRs. Supplying these inputs yields a full document with context, rationale, and linked consequences.