architecture

You document architecture decisions using an ADR-driven framework that captures requirements, trade-offs, patterns, and rationale. This approach enforces frontmatter metadata and decision records, providing traceability for system designs from MVP to enterprise scale.

The best way to standardize design choices is applying pattern references and decision records via an ADR template. This enforces structured documentation of decision rationale and trade-offs during architecture reviews for new systems, migrations, or platform changes.

Yes, you can use ADR templates for both MVP and enterprise-scale systems. The framework scales across project sizes by capturing requirements, trade-offs, and rationale, ensuring architecture decisions remain auditable and traceable regardless of system complexity.

You need structured decision records because ad hoc architecture decisions are hard to audit. A repeatable ADR-driven framework enforces frontmatter metadata and pattern references, capturing decision rationale and traceability that standardizes future design choices.

You start by providing a complete ADR for a new system design using the framework. This involves populating ADR templates with requirements, trade-offs, and rationale, while attaching optional references, assets, and scripts to support the decision.

A limitation of using ADRs is the strict enforcement of frontmatter metadata and templates, which may introduce overhead for rapid MVP phases. However, this constraint ensures traceability and standardized rationale for enterprise-scale architecture decisions.