| name | architectural-decisions |
| description | Use when encountering questions about WHY code is built a certain way, when about to make architectural changes (new patterns, restructuring, choosing between approaches), or when the user asks about design rationale in a Repowise-indexed codebase (.repowise/ directory exists). Also activates when commit messages or code comments contain decision signals like "WHY:", "DECISION:", "TRADEOFF:", "ADR:".
|
| user-invocable | false |
Architectural Decisions with Repowise
Repowise captures architectural decisions — the why behind how code is built.
get_why has four modes — pick by what you pass:
get_why(query="why is auth using JWT?") — keyword + semantic decision search.get_why(query="src/auth/service.py") — decisions governing that file, plus
its origin story and an alignment score (does the file still follow its own ADRs?).get_why(query="why was caching added?", targets=["src/auth/cache.py"]) —
target-anchored search; decisions touching the targets get boosted.get_why() — the decision-health dashboard.
Decisions are mined from eight sources (ADR files, CHANGELOG, PR/commit bodies,
inline markers, git archaeology, README/docs, code comments, and the doc pass)
and linked by supersedes / refines / relates_to / conflicts_with edges,
so a single answer can return a whole lineage chain. When no decision exists for
a path, get_why falls back to git archaeology so the call is never empty.
When the user asks "why is X built this way?"
Call get_why(query="X").
When about to make an architectural change
- Call
get_why(query="the specific area you're changing") to find existing decisions that govern that area.
- If decisions are found, present them to the user before proceeding — they may not want to contradict an existing architectural choice.
- If no decisions are found, proceed but note that no recorded decision governs this area.
When called with no specific query
Call get_why() with no arguments to get the decision-health dashboard:
- Stale decisions that may no longer apply
- Proposed decisions awaiting confirmation
- Ungoverned hotspots (high-churn files with no recorded decisions)
The same signals surface in the CLI via repowise decision health, and you can
review auto-proposed decisions with repowise decision confirm.
When a file has decision markers
If you see # WHY:, # DECISION:, # TRADEOFF:, or # ADR: comments in code, call get_context(targets=["that_file.py"]) to see the full decision record with context and affected modules.
Recording new decisions
If the user makes an architectural decision during the conversation, suggest: "Want to record this decision? Add a # DECISION: comment in the relevant code, or run repowise decision add to capture it formally."
