architecture-decisions

name	architecture-decisions
description	Make and document architecture decisions using structured frameworks
version	2.0.0
sasmp_version	1.3.0
bonded_agent	01-architecture-fundamentals
bond_type	PRIMARY_BOND
last_updated	2025-01

Architecture Decisions Skill

Purpose

Enable structured architecture decision-making through quality attribute analysis, trade-off evaluation, and technology selection using industry-standard frameworks.

---

Parameters

Parameter	Type	Required	Validation	Default
decision_context	string	✅	min: 30 chars	-
decision_type	enum	⚪	technology|pattern|tradeoff	tradeoff
quality_priorities	array	⚪	max: 5 items	["performance", "maintainability"]
constraints	object	⚪	valid JSON	{}
options	array	⚪	min: 2 items	-

---

Execution Flow

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. VALIDATE: Check input parameters                       │
│ 2. CONTEXTUALIZE: Understand problem domain               │
│ 3. IDENTIFY: List quality attributes and constraints      │
│ 4. ANALYZE: Evaluate options against criteria             │
│ 5. SCORE: Create decision matrix                          │
│ 6. RECOMMEND: Provide primary + alternatives              │
│ 7. DOCUMENT: Generate ADR content                         │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

---

Retry Logic

Error	Retry	Backoff	Max Attempts
VALIDATION_ERROR	No	-	1
CONTEXT_UNCLEAR	Yes	1s, 2s, 4s	3
INSUFFICIENT_OPTIONS	Yes	-	2

---

Logging & Observability

log_points:
  - event: skill_invoked
    level: info
    data: [decision_type, quality_priorities]
  - event: analysis_complete
    level: info
    data: [options_count, top_recommendation]
  - event: error_occurred
    level: error
    data: [error_type, context]

metrics:
  - name: decision_time_ms
    type: histogram
  - name: options_evaluated
    type: counter
  - name: confidence_score
    type: gauge

---

Error Handling

Error Code	Description	Recovery
E001	Missing decision context	Request clarification
E002	Conflicting quality attributes	Prioritization dialog
E003	Insufficient options to compare	Request more alternatives
E004	Unknown technology domain	Defer to research

---

Unit Test Template

test_cases:
  - name: "Database selection decision"
    input:
      decision_context: "E-commerce order management system"
      decision_type: "technology"
      quality_priorities: ["reliability", "performance"]
      options: ["PostgreSQL", "MongoDB"]
    expected:
      has_recommendation: true
      has_rationale: true
      confidence_gte: 0.7

  - name: "Missing context error"
    input:
      decision_context: ""
    expected:
      error_code: "E001"

  - name: "Microservices vs Monolith"
    input:
      decision_context: "Startup MVP with 4 developers"
      decision_type: "pattern"
      quality_priorities: ["deployability", "maintainability"]
    expected:
      has_trade_offs: true
      alternatives_count_gte: 1

---

Troubleshooting

Common Issues

Symptom	Root Cause	Resolution
Vague recommendation	Context too broad	Narrow scope, add constraints
Analysis paralysis	Too many options	Limit to top 3-4 viable options
Low confidence score	Missing information	Request specific metrics/requirements

Debug Checklist

□ Is problem domain clearly defined?
□ Are quality attributes prioritized?
□ Are all options technically viable?
□ Are constraints explicitly stated?
□ Is success criteria measurable?

---

Examples

Example: Technology Selection

Input:
  decision_context: "Real-time inventory system for retail"
  decision_type: "technology"
  quality_priorities: ["performance", "scalability"]
  options: ["Redis", "PostgreSQL", "MongoDB"]

Output:
  recommendation: "Redis for hot data + PostgreSQL for persistence"
  confidence: 0.85
  trade_offs:
    - "Redis: Fast but requires cache invalidation strategy"
    - "PostgreSQL: ACID compliant but higher latency"
  adr_content: |
    # ADR: Hybrid Redis + PostgreSQL for Inventory
    ## Decision: Use Redis for real-time inventory counts, PostgreSQL for order data
    ## Rationale: Balances performance needs with data durability

---

Integration

Component	Trigger	Data Flow
Agent 01	Decision request	Receives context, returns recommendation
Agent 02	ADR creation	Provides decision content for documentation

---

Quality Standards

• Atomic: Single decision per invocation
• Traceable: All decisions link to rationale
• Reversible: Document rollback strategy when applicable

---

Version History

Version	Date	Changes
2.0.0	2025-01	Production-grade: parameters, retry logic, tests
1.0.0	2024-12	Initial release