create-adr
Interactively create an architecture decision record (ADR). Use when the user wants to document an architectural decision, technology choice, or significant design decision. Guides through context gathering, options analysis, and consequence documentation.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-10
- Stars
- ★ 34
- Forks
- 2
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- create-adr
- description
- Interactively create an architecture decision record (ADR). Use when the user wants to document an architectural decision, technology choice, or significant design decision. Guides through context gathering, options analysis, and consequence documentation.
- allowed-tools
- [ "Bash(accelerator config *)", "Bash(accelerator corpus adr *)", "Bash(accelerator corpus metadata derive)", "Bash(accelerator corpus frontmatter validate *)" ]
- argument-hint
- [topic or description] [--supersedes ADR-NNNN]
03 SKILL.md 正文
Create Architecture Decision Record
!accelerator config context --skill create-adr --fail-safe
!accelerator config agents --fail-safe
If no "Agent Names" section appears above, use these defaults: accelerator:reviewer, accelerator:codebase-locator, accelerator:codebase-analyser, accelerator:codebase-pattern-finder, accelerator:documents-locator, accelerator:documents-analyser, accelerator:web-search-researcher.
Decisions directory: !accelerator config path decisions --fail-safe
You are tasked with guiding the user through creating an architecture decision record (ADR) — a concise document capturing a significant architectural decision, its context, the options considered, and the consequences.
Initial Setup
When this command is invoked:
- Check if parameters were provided:
- If a topic/description was provided, proceed directly to context gathering
- If
--supersedes ADR-NNNNwas provided, note the supersession target - If no parameters provided, respond with:
I'll help you create an architecture decision record. Please provide:
1. The topic or decision to document (e.g., "use PostgreSQL for user data")
2. Any relevant context or constraints
You can also specify if this supersedes an existing ADR:
`/accelerator:create-adr use Redis for caching --supersedes ADR-0003`
Then wait for the user's input.
Process Steps
Step 1: Determine ADR Number
-
Run the corpus CLI to get the next ADR number:
accelerator corpus adr next-number -
If
--supersedes ADR-NNNNwas specified:- Find the target ADR file by matching
{decisions directory}/ADR-NNNN-*.md - Verify exactly one file matches the glob pattern (error if zero or multiple matches)
- Read the target ADR's status using the corpus CLI:
accelerator corpus adr read-status <resolved-path> - Verify the target ADR is in
acceptedstatus (only accepted ADRs can be superseded). This is an early-fail check to avoid wasted effort — the status will be re-verified before writing in Step 4. - If not
accepted, inform the user and ask how to proceed
- Find the target ADR file by matching
Step 2: Gather Context
- Spawn agents to gather relevant context (in parallel):
- Use {documents locator agent} to find related research, plans, and existing ADRs in the configured document directories
- Use {codebase locator agent} to find relevant code related to the decision topic
-
Read any directly mentioned files fully
-
Present gathered context and ask clarifying questions:
Based on my research, here's what I found relevant to this decision:
**Related documents:**
- [list of relevant meta documents]
**Related code:**
- [list of relevant code areas]
**Existing ADRs on related topics:**
- [list of related ADRs, if any]
Before I draft the ADR, I'd like to understand:
1. What forces or constraints are driving this decision?
2. What alternatives have you considered?
3. Are there specific tradeoffs you want to highlight?
If context gathering finds nothing relevant (e.g., first ADR in a new project), skip the context sections and present:
No existing documents or ADRs found related to this topic. I'll draft the ADR
based on the information you provide.
Before I draft, I'd like to understand:
1. What forces or constraints are driving this decision?
2. What alternatives have you considered?
3. Are there specific tradeoffs you want to highlight?
Wait for user input before proceeding.
Step 3: Draft the ADR
-
Gather metadata by running
accelerator corpus metadata derive. -
Draft the ADR using the template below and present it to the user for review:
Here's my draft ADR:
[draft content]
Use the AskUserQuestion tool with two options:
- Yes, write to disk — save the ADR as shown
- No, revise first — make changes before saving
Wait for the user's answer before writing.
- Iterate on the draft based on user feedback. Only proceed to writing when the user approves.
Step 4: Write the ADR
-
Create the configured decisions directory if it doesn't exist
-
Populate frontmatter: before writing the artifact file, substitute the unified base fields into the template's frontmatter block, using the metadata captured in Step 3.
-
The
Current Date/Time (UTC):value fromaccelerator corpus metadata deriveis the source fordate:andlast_updated:. Repository identity is not part of the ADR provenance bundle (ADRs are not code-state-anchored). -
Substitute every field below with the indicated value:
type:←adrid:← the ADR identifierADR-NNNNfrom Step 1, always quoted as a YAML string (e.g.id: "ADR-0042")title:← the ADR title (without theADR-NNNN:prefix)date:← theCurrent Date/Time (UTC):valueauthor:← the author resolved per the standard chain (config → VCS user → prompt)producer:←create-adrstatus:←proposedlast_updated:← the sameCurrent Date/Time (UTC):valuelast_updated_by:← the same value resolved forauthorschema_version:←1(bare integer)
Optional linkage / decision-maker keys are omit-by-default: the template shows each as
""/[], but write a key into the artifact only when it has a value, and omit it entirely otherwise (do not carry the empty placeholder through).parent:← the owning work item as a typed-linkage ref ("work-item:NNNN"). Fill when the ADR is owned by a work item; otherwise omit the key.supersedes:← a YAML list of typed-linkage refs of the form"adr:ADR-NNNN"to the ADR(s) this one replaces. Fill when this ADR supersedes another; otherwise omit the key.relates_to:← list of typed-linkage refs to loosely related ADRs (["adr:ADR-NNNN", ...]). Fill when related decisions are explicit; otherwise omit the key.decision_makers:← a YAML list of the people who agreed to the decision. Fill when decision-makers are captured; otherwise omit the key.
-
-
Write the ADR to:
{decisions directory}/ADR-NNNN-description.mdwhere NNNN is the number from Step 1 and description is a kebab-case summary -
If this supersedes an existing ADR:
- Read the superseded ADR's current status to confirm it's
accepted - Update ONLY the superseded ADR's frontmatter:
- Change
status: acceptedtostatus: superseded - Add
superseded_by: ADR-MMMM(where MMMM is the new ADR number)
- Change
- Do NOT modify any other content in the superseded ADR
- Append the new ADR's typed-linkage ref to the new ADR's
supersedes:list (e.g.["adr:ADR-0017"])
- Read the superseded ADR's current status to confirm it's
-
Present the result:
ADR created: `{decisions directory}/ADR-NNNN-description.md`
Status: proposed
[If supersession]: Updated ADR-XXXX status to "superseded"
Next steps:
- Review and refine while in "proposed" status
- When ready, use `/accelerator:review-adr` to accept or reject
Validate the frontmatter: after writing the ADR, run
accelerator corpus frontmatter validate --file {decisions directory}/ADR-NNNN-description.md
If it exits non-zero, the document violates the canonical frontmatter standard; report the emitted violation and fix the frontmatter before completing.
ADR Template
Use this exact template structure when generating ADRs:
!accelerator config template adr --fail-safe
Quality Guidelines
When drafting ADRs, follow these principles:
- Concise: One to two pages maximum. Match length to problem complexity.
- Assertive: Use active voice ("We will...", "We chose...")
- Balanced: Include genuine pros AND cons. Avoid the "Fairy Tale" pattern (only pros, no cons)
- Honest options: Only include options that were genuinely considered. Avoid "Dummy Alternatives" (non-viable options to make preferred choice look good)
- Focused: Each ADR captures ONE decision. If you find multiple decisions, suggest creating separate ADRs.
- Context-rich: Explain WHY, not just WHAT. Future readers need to understand the forces at play.
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
- Fairy Tale: Only listing positive consequences
- Dummy Alternative: Including obviously non-viable options
- Mega-ADR: Multi-page documents crammed with implementation detail
- Blueprint in Disguise: Reads like a cookbook, not a decision journal
- Missing context: Decision without the forces that drove it
Important Notes
- New ADRs ALWAYS start with status
proposed - ADR numbers are NEVER reused — always increment from the highest existing
- File naming is
ADR-NNNN-description.md(e.g.,ADR-0001-use-jujutsu.md) - Only modify existing ADRs to update status fields during supersession
- Cross-reference related documents in the References section
- Use {documents locator agent} and {codebase locator agent} agents for context, not deep file reads in the main context
- Dual status fields: The template includes status in both YAML frontmatter
(
status: proposed) and the body (**Status**: Proposed). The frontmatter is the authoritative source of truth —accelerator corpus adr read-statusreads only frontmatter. The body line is for human readability. When updating status, ALWAYS update both locations. - Before writing a new ADR file, verify the target path does not already exist to prevent accidental overwrites from concurrent invocations
!accelerator config instructions create-adr --fail-safe
04 同仓库更多 Skills
explore-pr
Build an interactive, design-first and picture-first exploration page for a pull request — its architecture, abstractions and design decisions drawn as diagrams, a guided tour in reading order with code as the evidence, an attention map of where the risk sits, a ledger of its riskiest operations, prior review findings re-checked against the code, and simulations specific to the PR — with the reviewer's verdicts and notes saved. Use when the user wants to explore, understand or review a large pull request or its design, asks for a review page, walkthrough or visual explanation of a PR, or is struggling to review a big change.
update-work-item
Update fields (status, priority, tags, parent, etc.) of an existing work item. Use to transition status, change priority, manage tags, or edit any frontmatter field. No transition enforcement — arbitrary changes are allowed.
sync-work-items
Reconcile local work items in meta/work/ with the active remote tracker named by work.integration. Use when the user wants to sync, push, or pull work items to or from Jira or Linear, preview what a sync would change, or reconcile divergent local and remote state.
sync-work-items-recovery
Recovery procedures for work sync failures that need a person — terminal rows, refused pending pushes and refused orders. Read by sync-work-items — not invoked directly.
stress-test-work-item
Interactively stress-test a work item by grilling the user on scope, assumptions, acceptance criteria, edge cases, and dependencies to surface issues, gaps, and flawed assumptions before implementation is planned.
review-work-item
Review a work item through multiple quality lenses and collaboratively iterate based on findings. Use when the user wants to evaluate a work item before implementation or escalation.