Skip to main content

architecture-decision-records

Creates and reviews architecture decision records (ADRs), decision logs, and supersession histories using established conventions and verifiable evidence. Use when users ask to write, reconstruct, audit, standardize, validate, or maintain ADRs, architecture decisions, decision logs, or ADR templates in Markdown or reStructuredText.

来源信息

仓库
dirnbauer/webconsulting-skills
最近来源活动
2026年7月15日 19:36
检测到的 SKILL.md 语言
英语
星标
33
分支
6

安装方式

默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt;你也可以切换为直接命令,或下载本地副本。

检查来源文件

决定是否安装前,请先阅读 SKILL.md,以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。

文件资源管理器
5 个文件

正在显示 SKILL.md

SKILL.md
来源说明 · 只读预览
name
architecture-decision-records
description
Creates and reviews architecture decision records (ADRs), decision logs, and supersession histories using established conventions and verifiable evidence. Use when users ask to write, reconstruct, audit, standardize, validate, or maintain ADRs, architecture decisions, decision logs, or ADR templates in Markdown or reStructuredText.
# Architecture decision records Write ADRs as a durable record of why one architecturally significant choice was made. Prefer a small factual record over a broad design guide. ## Workflow 1. Read repository instructions, existing ADRs, documentation tooling, and the implementation affected by the decision. 2. Decide whether the record is prospective or retrospective. Never present a reconstructed decision as if it had been written when the choice was made. 3. Identify one significant decision. Split independent, phased, or separately reversible choices into separate records. 4. Use the repository's established template. Without one, use Nygard's minimal anatomy: status, context, decision, and consequences. Add alternatives when they explain the choice; use MADR when option comparison needs more detail. 5. For a retrospective ADR, inspect Git history first. Record relevant commit hashes and dates, then verify every claim against current code, tests, configuration, and authoritative platform documentation. 6. Write context as forces and constraints, not a disguised solution. State the decision assertively. Include material benefits, costs, risks, and limits. 7. Use `Proposed`, `Accepted`, `Rejected`, `Deprecated`, or `Superseded by ADR-NNN`. Preserve accepted and rejected records; supersede them with a new ADR instead of rewriting history. 8. Update the decision-log index and reciprocal supersession links. Render or lint the documentation using the repository's native toolchain. 9. Run the bundled validator and report unresolved evidence gaps honestly. ## Quality rules - Use monotonic identifiers and never reuse a removed number. - Keep one decision per record and make the title describe that decision. - Separate observed facts, the selected decision, and expected consequences. - Include credible alternatives; do not create straw-man options. - Do not assign net scores or weights unless the ADR defines a scoring model and cites the measurements behind it. - Distinguish verified history from inference and current policy from past fact. - Keep secrets, personal data, and internal credentials out of evidence. - Keep the record concise, standalone, linkable, and reviewable in a code diff. ## Validation ```bash python3 skills/architecture-decision-records/scripts/validate_adrs.py docs/adr \ --git-repo . --require-history ``` Omit `--require-history` for prospective records. Add the repository's own renderer, link checker, or Markdown/ReST linter after this structural check. ## Resources - Read [references/best-practices.md](references/best-practices.md) for the standards landscape, lifecycle, evidence method, and review rubric. - Copy [assets/adr-template.md](assets/adr-template.md) for Markdown projects. - Copy [assets/AdrTemplate.rst](assets/AdrTemplate.rst) for TYPO3 or other ReST documentation projects.
在 GitHub 查看