visa-paradigm-advisor

To choose a programming paradigm for a new software architecture, you weigh multiple options like OO, FP, event-driven, or actor model against team constraints, maturity, and delivery timelines. This analysis proposes evaluated options with trade-offs and risk signals to ensure deliberate architectural decisions.

The best way to document architectural trade-offs between functional and object-oriented programming is by generating a canonical paradigm_decision.md artifact. This artifact captures domain inputs, presents 2-3 evaluated paradigm options with risk signals, and records explicit decisions to guide downstream agents.

You need to evaluate an event-driven architecture over an actor model when discovered domain artifacts and team maturity constraints require careful classification. The evaluation proposes 2-3 paradigm options with explicit trade-offs aligned to organizational skills and delivery timelines.

To generate a paradigm decision document for downstream teams, provide brief domain context and team inputs to produce a canonical paradigm_decision.md artifact. Save this artifact in your project repository to capture trade-offs, record explicit decisions, and govern downstream development.

Yes, you can use a paradigm advisor if your team lacks functional programming experience. The evaluation explicitly weighs paradigm options against team maturity and organizational skills, ensuring proposed architectures align with actual delivery capabilities rather than theoretical ideals.

The limitation of defaulting to the latest programming trend for new domain architecture is the failure to account for discovered domain artifacts, team maturity, and constraints. Deliberate architectural choice ensures maintainability by evaluating trade-offs and risk signals across multiple viable paradigms.