Sanook captures a significant technical decision as a structured Architecture Decision Record (Michael Nygard format) — context, decision, alternatives considered, consequences — written to docs/adr/ as numbered files with an index.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
A direct command skips the review prompt. Inspect the source before running it.
Sanook captures a significant technical decision as a structured Architecture Decision Record (Michael Nygard format) — context, decision, alternatives considered, consequences — written to docs/adr/ as numbered files with an index.
when_to_use
A decision moment appears ('let's go with X instead of Y', choosing a stack/library/pattern/boundary); user asks to 'record this decision' or 'write an ADR'; locking in an architectural choice.
When to Use
Invoke when a decision is being locked in and would be expensive to reverse or confusing to re-litigate later:
A choice was made between real options: "let's go with X instead of Y" — a stack, library, framework, datastore, protocol, pattern, or module boundary.
User explicitly says "record this decision" / "write an ADR" / "ADR this".
Reversing an earlier decision (the old ADR must be superseded, not silently deleted).
Do NOT use for: reversible implementation details, code style nits, or decisions with no real alternative (those go in code comments or commit messages, not an ADR). One ADR = one decision; if the prompt bundles several, split them.
Steps
Name the decision and its trigger before writing. State it as a single sentence: "We will use X for Y, because Z." If you can't, the decision isn't ripe — ask which option won and why the alternatives lost. Capture the trigger (the problem/forcing function that made a decision necessary) — that becomes Context. If no genuine alternative was ever on the table, stop: it's not an ADR.
Locate or create docs/adr/. Check whether the repo already has an ADR directory — common locations: docs/adr/, docs/architecture/decisions/, doc/adr/, adr/. Reuse the existing one and its filename convention; do NOT invent a parallel directory. If none exists, create docs/adr/.
Assign the next sequential number. List existing files (ls docs/adr/), find the highest NNNN, add 1. Zero-pad to 4 digits. Filename: NNNN-kebab-case-title.md (e.g. 0007-use-postgres-for-event-store.md). Never reuse or renumber an existing ADR number — numbers are permanent IDs other ADRs link to.
Write the record in Nygard format, exactly these sections in order:
# NNNN. <Shortimperativetitle>- Status: <Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | SupersededbyADR-MMMM>- Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>## Context<Theforcesatplay:theproblem, constraints, requirements, andassumptionsthatmakeadecisionnecessary.Factualandneutral — nosolutionyet.>## Decision
<"We will ..." — the choice, stated actively and unambiguously. One decision.>
## Alternatives Considered-**<OptionA>** — <whatitis> — rejected because <concretereason>.
— — rejected because .
Maintain the index. Keep docs/adr/README.md (or index.md) as a table: # | Title | Status | Date, one row per ADR, linking to each file. Append the new row; update the Status cell of any ADR whose status changed. Create the index if it's missing.
On a reversal, supersede — never edit history. To overturn ADR-N: write a new ADR-M for the new decision, and in its Context reference ADR-N. Then change ADR-N's status line to Superseded by ADR-M (with a link) — do not rewrite ADR-N's body or delete it. Link both ways: new ADR points back to the one it replaces. Accepted ADRs are immutable except for the Status field.
Common Errors
Editing an accepted ADR's body to "update" a decision. Accepted ADRs are an append-only log. A change of mind is a new, superseding ADR — never a rewrite of the old one. Only the Status line of an existing ADR may change.
Reusing/skipping a number. Numbers are permanent references. Deleting ADR-0004 and giving 0004 to a new decision corrupts every link that pointed at the old one. Always take max + 1.
No real alternatives section. Listing only the chosen option (or alternatives with no stated reason for rejection) makes the ADR worthless — the whole value is why the other paths lost. Each alternative needs a concrete rejection reason.
Context that already contains the decision. Context = forces and constraints only. If "we will use X" appears in Context, you've collapsed the record. Keep the problem and the solution in separate sections.
All-positive Consequences. Every real decision has a cost (new dependency to maintain, lock-in, migration work). Omitting negatives hides the tradeoff future readers most need.
Multiple decisions in one ADR. "Use Postgres AND adopt hexagonal architecture" is two ADRs. Bundled records can't be individually superseded later. Split them.
Forgetting the index / dangling supersede link. A new ADR not added to the index, or an old ADR left as Accepted after being replaced, makes the log lie about current state. Update both sides.
Leaking private context — personal/author names, machine paths, internal tickets, secrets in Context or Decision. Keep it about the system, with generic placeholders.
Verify
Decision stated as one clear "We will ..." sentence; exactly one decision in the record.
File is docs/adr/NNNN-kebab-title.md with NNNN = highest existing + 1, zero-padded; no number reused.
All five sections present and correctly scoped: Status, Context (forces only, no solution), Decision, Alternatives Considered (each with a why-rejected reason), Consequences (includes negatives).
Status is a valid value (Proposed/Accepted/Deprecated/Superseded by ADR-MMMM) and matches reality.
Index (README.md/index.md) has a row for this ADR linking to it; statuses there match the files.
If this reverses a prior decision: old ADR's Status changed to Superseded by ADR-N (body untouched), and the new ADR links back to it — both directions.
No personal identifiers, absolute home paths, internal URLs, or secrets anywhere in the record.
Status starts Proposed unless the decision is already final-and-shipped (then Accepted). Context describes why a decision is needed, not the decision. Consequences MUST include negatives — an ADR with only upsides is propaganda, not a record.
