grill-with-docs

To stress-test your technical design and document the output, you can use a rigorous critical review process that acts as a relentless interviewer to identify gaps and weaknesses, converting the insights into structured Architecture Decision Records and project glossaries.

The best way to identify logical gaps in software architecture is through an interactive questioning process that rigorously critiques your project plans, exposing hidden assumptions and architectural risks before any code is written.

You can automatically generate Architecture Decision Records by integrating a critical review workflow with domain modeling, which captures the insights gained during the grilling session and converts them into formal ADR documentation.

You need a formal critical review for product development plans when you have a rough draft of a system architecture and must ensure the design is robust enough to withstand implementation before writing a single line of code.

Yes, you can use the critical review process to build a project glossary alongside ADRs, as it operates within domain modeling workflows to capture structured documentation of your technical designs and product terminology.

The limitation of using interactive questioning for architectural risk assessment is that it requires a rough draft of your system architecture to critique, meaning it cannot generate foundational design concepts from scratch but only evaluate existing ones.