| name | adr-authoring |
| description | Write Architecture Decision Records when making significant technical choices. Use when selecting tools, patterns, frameworks, or making structural changes that future developers need to understand. |
ADR Authoring
Record decisions so future-you (and future-teammates) know WHY, not just WHAT.
When to write an ADR
- Choosing between competing approaches (framework A vs B)
- Adopting a pattern that constrains future work
- Rejecting an obvious approach (explain why not)
- Changing a previous decision (superseding)
Do NOT write ADRs for: trivial choices, temporary experiments, or decisions that are easily reversed.
Format (MADR-lite)
# ADR-NNNN: [Decision Title]
**Status:** proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-XXXX
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Deciders:** [who was involved]
## Context
What is the issue? What forces are at play? Why does this decision need to be made now?
## Decision
What did we decide? State it clearly in one sentence, then elaborate.
## Consequences
### Positive
- [What becomes easier or better]
### Negative
- [What becomes harder or what we give up]
### Neutral
- [Side effects that aren't clearly good or bad]
## Alternatives Considered
### [Alternative 1]
- Pros: ...
- Cons: ...
- Why rejected: ...
## References
- [Research artifact that informed this] (link to docs/research/ if applicable)
- [Related ADRs]
Lifecycle
- Proposed — written, not yet agreed upon
- Accepted — team agrees, implementation proceeds
- Deprecated — no longer applies (explain why)
- Superseded — replaced by a newer ADR (link to it)
Storage
- Path:
docs/adrs/NNNN-short-title.md
- Number sequentially (0001, 0002, ...)
- Keep an index in
docs/adrs/README.md or link from project README
Linking to research
If a research artifact (warlock output, BPAPPA survey) informed this decision, link it:
## References
- [Research: JWT vs Session Auth](../research/bpappa-auth-patterns.md) — informed this decision
The research artifact should back-link: Consumed by: ADR-0003