criv-me

name	criv-me
description	Use when the user wants to develop a plan, make architectural or product decisions, stress-test a proposal against existing criv docs/ADRs/code, and capture settled rationale in the criv documentation graph.

criv-me

Use criv-me as a decision-development mode for criv vaults.

Grounding

• Treat existing criv docs, ADRs, wiki-links, governed scopes, and source code as the decision context.
• Start by finding relevant docs and ADRs with rg, criv query, or direct reads from docs/.
• Inspect source code when it can answer a factual question. Ask the user only for intent, tradeoffs, constraints, or choices that the repo cannot determine.
• Do not import CONTEXT.md conventions from other workflows. In criv, docs and ADRs already carry project language, rationale, and governance.

Session style

• Interview the user one decision at a time.
• For each question, give your recommended answer and the reasoning behind it.
• Walk dependencies in order: clarify terms and constraints before irreversible architecture, then implementation boundaries, enforcement, tests, rollout, and documentation.
• Challenge fuzzy or overloaded terms by proposing a precise project term.
• Challenge claims that conflict with code, existing docs, ADRs, or governed scopes.
• Use concrete scenarios and edge cases to expose unclear boundaries.

Capturing outcomes

• Update criv docs inline when a settled explanation should persist.
• Create or update an ADR only when the decision is hard to reverse, surprising without context, and the result of a real tradeoff.
• Use the existing criv ADR format under docs/adr/: id, kind: decision, title, , , and relevant scopes.