design

Create a QRDSPI design artifact with tradeoffs and review gating.

1|1|Updated Apr 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/luan/agents --skill design-luan
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: design
Source: https://github.com/luan/agents/tree/main/skills/design
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/luan/agents --skill design-luan

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

It helps you quickly turn messy context into a compact design decision artifact that captures the chosen direction, the key tradeoffs, and what still blocks agreement.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Evidence-first design artifact creation: Loads relevant vault artifacts and verifies the current code state enough to choose direction without drowning in implementation detail.
  • Decision-focused writing with tradeoffs: Produces 3–5 load-bearing design decisions with rationale, includes rejected alternatives only when they clarify the choice, and links to research for evidence.
  • Review-gated artifact refinement: Resolves the artifact to an absolute local path and runs a plannotator gate workflow, revising and re-gating until approved before committing.

Quick Start

Use the design skill to create or update a design discussion artifact for the topic "build a QRDSPI design hub" with auto mode enabled.

Frequently Asked Questions about design

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I record architecture decisions and tradeoffs without getting bogged down in implementation details?

To record architecture decisions and tradeoffs, you can create a compact design discussion artifact that selects a solution direction from available evidence. It focuses strictly on boundary and behavior definition, leaving implementation sequencing out of scope.

What is the best way to document design discussions and capture the rationale behind rejected alternatives?

Documenting design discussions is best handled by producing 3 to 5 load-bearing design decisions with rationale. This artifact includes rejected alternatives only when they clarify the choice and links to research for evidence.

How do I enforce review gating for design artifacts using absolute local paths?

To enforce review gating for design artifacts, the skill resolves the artifact to an absolute local path and runs a plannotator gate workflow. It revises and re-gates the artifact until approved, committing only after explicit approval.

Can I use YAML frontmatter discovery fields to automatically load context for architecture direction selection?

Yes, you can use YAML frontmatter discovery fields to load relevant vault artifacts and verify current code state. This mechanism provides the necessary evidence and user context for choosing architecture direction.

Does this design discussion approach require implementation decomposition before logging a decision?

No, this approach does not require implementation decomposition. It applies specifically to architecture direction selection and decision logging for tasks where implementation sequencing and decomposition are explicitly out of scope.

Why does my design artifact need to resolve to an absolute local path before committing?

Your design artifact needs to resolve to an absolute local path to properly enforce the review gating workflow via plannotator. This ensures the artifact is revised and re-gated correctly until approved before any commit occurs.