— No reviews yet
0 installs
11 views
0.0% view→install
Install
$ agentstack add skill-8dionysus-aoa-skills-aoa-adr-write ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Are you the author of Aoa Adr Write? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claimAbout
aoa-adr-write
Intent
Use this skill to capture an architectural, structural, or workflow decision in a concise reviewable note, then place and verify that note in the canonical repo surface so the rationale stays findable.
Trigger boundary
Use this skill when:
- a decision changes structure, boundaries, tooling, or workflow expectations
- future contributors will need to know why a path was chosen
- several plausible options existed and the reasoning matters
- the team or project risks repeating the same debate later
- the note needs a clear canonical home, not just a one-off comment
- the decision crosses ownership, layer, evidence, lifecycle, portability, runtime-facing, handoff, risk, or scale boundaries and needs a durable rationale
- reviewed evidence, planning work, generated output, audit results, or operational receipts have revealed a decision that must stay separate from the evidence that revealed it
Do not use this skill when:
- the change is tiny and self-evident
- the note would only restate an obvious diff with no real decision content
- the main problem is unclear authoritative documentation rather than decision rationale; use
aoa-source-of-truth-checkfirst - the main problem is deciding whether logic belongs in the core or at the edge; use
aoa-core-logic-boundaryfirst - no decision exists yet and the next step is still discovery, option framing, or owner-route clarification
- the boundary itself is still ambiguous; use
aoa-bounded-context-mapbefore recording the decision - the request is to record every possible lens, provisional hint, planning idea, or generated observation without one reviewed decision to preserve
- the decision is an ordinary implementation choice whose rationale is already clear from the diff, tests, commit message, or review summary
- the next honest move is a runbook, incident note, risk approval, or operational follow-up rather than durable decision rationale
Inputs
- decision to record
- context and problem statement
- relevant options or alternatives
- chosen path and rationale
- known consequences or tradeoffs
- owner, source, evidence, placement, or lifecycle boundaries that shape the decision
Outputs
- concise decision note or ADR draft
- statement of rationale
- consequence notes
- canonical placement or reference for the note
- verification that the note landed in the expected decision surface
- verification that the note matches the actual change
- decision-boundary notes that say what the ADR records and what stays with stronger owners, evidence surfaces, generated or derived outputs, or follow-up routes
Procedure
- confirm a real decision exists and is meaningful enough to record; if not, route to discovery rather than writing an ADR
- when placement, owner, evidence, or lifecycle could blur the record, choose the smallest useful decision-lens set from
references/decision-boundary-lenses.md - state the context and the problem the decision addresses
- list the main options if they meaningfully shaped the choice
- record the chosen decision in clear language
- note why it was chosen and what tradeoffs it introduces
- place the note in the canonical decision surface or repo-local home that future reviewers should use
- connect the note to the actual change surface when relevant
- verify that the note explains the decision rather than narrating the diff only
- verify that the note is reachable from the intended canonical location
Contracts
- the note should explain why, not just what changed
- the decision should be bounded and understandable
- tradeoffs should not be hidden behind certainty theater
- the note should help future reviewers, not merely satisfy process
- the note should have an explicit canonical placement, not a hidden or implied home
- the note should distinguish the decision from the evidence, planning surface, generated output, audit result, workflow event, or runtime-facing event that motivated it
- decision lenses should be selected only when they clarify the decision's authority, placement, or future effect
- the skill should prefer no ADR when a lighter artifact preserves enough rationale for future work
- verification should check both rationale quality and note placement
Risks and anti-patterns
- writing an ADR for a trivial edit with no real decision
- writing a decision record before a decision actually exists
- using inflated language to mask weak reasoning
- recording the chosen path without naming consequences
- letting the ADR drift away from the actual change
- treating placement as optional after the note is written
- using the skill when the main work is still source-of-truth clarification
- treating a provisional note, generated observation, planning wish, or workflow candidate as a reviewed decision without owner evidence
- copying stronger owner law into a local ADR instead of naming the decision's handoff and authority limit
- creating ADR clutter for ordinary implementation choices that need verification or review summary instead
- applying decision lenses exhaustively until the ADR becomes a governance essay
Verification
- confirm the decision was meaningful enough to record
- confirm the rationale is explicit
- confirm consequences or tradeoffs are named
- confirm at least one rejected option or accepted tradeoff is visible when alternatives shaped the choice
- confirm the note aligns with the real change surface
- confirm the note is placed where future reviewers will look for it
- confirm the canonical location or reference is part of the result, not an afterthought
- confirm a lighter artifact would not preserve enough rationale before creating a durable ADR
- confirm evidence, generated, planning, workflow, or runtime-facing surfaces are cited as context rather than promoted into decision authority
- confirm any selected decision lenses are necessary and narrow enough for this one decision
Technique traceability
Manifest-backed techniques:
- AOA-T-0033 from
8Dionysus/aoa-techniquesat3b1d5d623569aa4920b87280d0db0e911d2e29d5using pathtechniques/instruction/docs-boundary/decision-rationale-recording/TECHNIQUE.mdand sections: Intent, When to use, When not to use, Inputs, Outputs, Core procedure, Contracts, Risks, Validation - AOA-T-0002 from
8Dionysus/aoa-techniquesat3b1d5d623569aa4920b87280d0db0e911d2e29d5using pathtechniques/instruction/docs-boundary/source-of-truth-layout/TECHNIQUE.mdand sections: Intent, When to use, When not to use, Inputs, Outputs, Core procedure, Contracts, Risks, Validation
Adaptation points
Future project overlays may add:
- local ADR templates
- alternative decision-note homes outside formal
docs/adr/layouts - a short decision-lens pass from
references/decision-boundary-lenses.mdwhen durable rationale crosses owner, layer, evidence, workflow, runtime-facing, or scale boundaries - a compact note skeleton from
references/decision-note.template.mdwhen no repo-local template exists - local placement rules
- local template variants that still preserve context, options, decision, and consequences
- architecture review expectations
- cross-linking rules back to canonical authority docs without replacing them
- repository-specific examples
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: 8Dionysus
- Source: 8Dionysus/aoa-skills
- License: Apache-2.0
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.