decisions

You can log architectural decisions using structured frontmatter-driven metadata to capture rationale, alternatives, and consequences, ensuring full traceability across features and repo-level domains. The skill maintains two tracks: quick log entries for near-term choices and formal ADRs for lasting guidelines.

Create a quick log entry for near-term, in-flight feature decisions, and create a formal ADR for long-lived architectural choices. The skill enforces clear criteria for when to use each track, prompting for revisit triggers and consequences specifically for lasting architectural decisions.

A valid architecture decision record requires mandatory frontmatter-driven metadata fields. The skill enforces this structure to capture rationale, alternatives, consequences, and revisit triggers, ensuring decisions are consistently formatted for audits and onboarding.

Yes, you can iteratively revise existing ADRs and log entries. The skill supports iterative revision, allowing you to append updates, reference prior decisions, and adjust revisit triggers as feature requirements or repo-level architectural guidelines evolve.

The best way to document decision rationale for audits is using a structured ADR format that explicitly prompts for alternatives, rationale, and consequences. This ensures all context is surfaced for onboarding and compliance reviews across the repository.

Yes, the approach applies to both feature-level decisions and repo-level architectural guidelines. It provides two distinct tracks for governance and traceability, ensuring both in-flight choices and long-lived architectural standards are documented with clear context.