Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

architecture-decision

Document a technical decision in an architecture decision record, or ADR. Capture its context, alternatives, and consequences, assign a record number, and distinguish a proposed decision from an accepted one so dependent work reflects its actual status.

OriginalShow the original description

Create an ADR documenting a technical decision: context, alternatives considered, consequences.

See how to install

Good for

  • Recording the reasons behind a technical choice
  • Documenting alternatives and consequences of a design decision
  • Creating numbered records alongside existing architecture decisions
  • Accepting a settled decision before dependent stories proceed

Files included (8)

  • SKILL.md6.7 KB
  • CONTRACT.md10.5 KB
  • references/0-accept.md5.0 KB
  • references/0-retrofit.md3.6 KB
  • references/1-engine-context.md1.7 KB
  • references/3-gather-context.md3.5 KB
  • references/4-decide.md3.6 KB
  • references/5-generate.md12.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density,team.size

Resolved above — use as-is; --review overrides review_mode. No block → defaults in .claude/docs/config-resolution.md.

Architecture Decision

When this skill is invoked:

0. Parse Arguments — Detect Retrofit / Acceptance Mode

See .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in .claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.

Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md (collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds; automation_always_ask categories always prompt).

team.size: which agents validate this ADR (orthogonal to review_mode/workflow).

  • individual (default): technical-director (TD-ADR) + the engine-specialist.
  • small and studio: the same two. This skill spawns no engine sub-specialist and no adversarial reviewer at any size.

docs.density — it controls the depth of the ADR's prose sections, not which sections the skeleton emits (that is fixed). modes.rigor sets it alongside workflow; set docs.density explicitly to vary ADR verbosity alone: terse (the default, via rigor: minimal) = decision + alternatives as bullets, one line of rationale each; balanced = paragraph per section with light rationale (rigor: standard); thorough = full prose with trade-offs and worked rationale in Decision, Alternatives, and Consequences. Apply it to the prose sections; the Engine Compatibility, ADR Dependencies, and GDD Requirements tables are structural and stay whole at every density.

workflow (see .claude/docs/workflow-modes.md):

  • full — all ADRs on the required ADR list must be completed.
  • standard — critical ADRs only (Foundation-layer systems).
  • minimal — not required. Can still be run voluntarily.

If the argument starts with retrofit followed by a file path

Read references/0-retrofit.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

If the argument starts with accept followed by an ADR id

Read references/0-accept.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

If NOT in retrofit or acceptance mode, proceed to Step 1 below (normal ADR authoring).

No-argument guard: If no argument was provided (title is empty), ask before running Phase 0:

"What technical decision are you documenting? Please provide a short title (e.g., event-system-architecture, physics-engine-choice)."

Use the user's response as the title, then proceed to Step 1.


1. Load Engine Context (ALWAYS FIRST)

Read references/1-engine-context.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

2. Determine the next ADR number

Scan docs/architecture/ for existing ADRs to find the next number.


3. Gather context

Read references/3-gather-context.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

4. Guide the decision collaboratively

Read references/4-decide.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

5. Generate the ADR

Read references/5-generate.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.

6. Closing Next Steps

After the ADR is written (and registry optionally updated), close with AskUserQuestion.

Before generating the widget:

  1. Read the ## Required ADRs section of docs/architecture/architecture.md (by section) and list docs/architecture/adr-*.md: a required ADR with no file is still unwritten. Without architecture.md, look for ADRs flagged in technical-preferences.md or systems-index.md as prerequisites
  2. Check if all prerequisite ADRs are now written. If yes, include a "Start writing GDDs" option.
  3. List ALL remaining priority ADRs as individual options — not just the next one or two.

Widget format:

ADR-[NNNN] written and registry updated. What would you like to do next?
[1] Write [next-priority-adr-name] — [brief description from prerequisites list]
[2] Write [another-priority-adr] — [brief description]  (include ALL remaining ones)
[N] Start writing GDDs — run `/design-system [first-undesigned-system]` (only show if all prerequisite ADRs are written)
[N+1] Stop here for this session

If there are no remaining priority ADRs and no undesigned GDD systems, offer only "Stop here" and suggest running /architecture-review in a fresh session.

Always include this fixed notice in the closing output (do NOT omit it):

To validate ADR coverage against your GDDs, open a fresh Claude Code session and run /architecture-review.

Never run /architecture-review in the same session as /architecture-decision. The reviewing agent must be independent of the authoring context to give an unbiased assessment. Running it here would invalidate the review.

Do NOT unblock stories here. This ADR is Proposed — Step 5 guarantees it, and a story blocked pending this decision is still pending it. Unblocking on authoring defeats the guard at the moment it becomes relevant: the pipeline appears to flow while running on decisions nobody has accepted.

Instead, tell the user what is now waiting on acceptance:

"ADR-NNNN is written and Proposed. [N] stories remain Blocked pending it. Run /architecture-decision accept ADR-NNNN when the decision is settled — that is what moves them to Ready."

List the blocked stories by path so the cost of leaving it Proposed is visible. (Acceptance has consequences enforced across many skills and an authority recorded in only a few, so the route between them must stay explicit.)

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

adopt

FreeSummary

Audit an existing project's design documents and supporting files to check whether their formats work with the template's skills. Get a numbered migration plan that prioritizes gaps and required changes, rather than simply listing what exists.

  • Checking existing documents before adopting a project template
  • Auditing game design documents or architecture decision records
  • Prioritizing gaps in project tracking and configuration files
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Review whether game design requirements are covered by documented architecture decisions. Identify missing coverage, conflicting decisions, and engine compatibility concerns, with an optional matrix linking requirements to development stories and tests.

  • Find game requirements without architecture decisions
  • Check for conflicts between architecture decisions
  • Review compatibility with the pinned engine version
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

art-bible

FreeSummary

Create a game's art direction document, defining its visual rules, mood, shapes, colors, and production standards. Review and approve sections individually, with guidance that connects character, environment, and interface design to the game's concept and technical constraints.

  • Defining a game's core visual identity before asset production
  • Documenting character, environment, and interface design rules
  • Aligning asset standards with engine and performance limits
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

asset-audit

FreeSummary

Audit game asset files for naming rules, size limits, formats, and broken references. Receive a report of measured violations and suggested fixes, with clear explanations of checks that lack data or cannot be assessed for the engine.

  • Checking image and audio naming conventions
  • Finding files that exceed asset size limits
  • Investigating missing references and potentially unused assets
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

asset-spec

FreeSummary

Turn game design documents and character profiles into asset specifications and image generation prompts. Define appearance, dimensions, file formats, and naming rules, then maintain an asset list that tracks progress and identifies shared assets.

  • List the visual assets needed for a game
  • Define consistent character and environment asset specifications
  • Prepare image generation prompts from an art direction guide
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

balance-check

FreeSummary

Review game data and formulas for combat, economy, progression, or loot. Compare values with documented targets, identify dominant strategies and broken resource loops, and produce prioritized adjustment recommendations while clearly marking areas that lack enough data.

  • Comparing weapon damage and combat effectiveness
  • Finding resource loops and pricing problems
  • Reviewing experience and power progression
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios26.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by Donchitos

Report a problem with this skill