ADR Decision Extraction

---

name: adr-decision-extraction

description: Extract architectural decisions from conversations. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off discussions, and explicit choices. Use when analyzing session transcripts for ADR generation.

---

# ADR Decision Extraction

Extract architectural decisions from conversation context for ADR generation.

Detection Signals

| Signal Type | Examples |

|-------------|----------|

| Explicit markers | `[ADR]`, "decided:", "the decision is" |

| Choice patterns | "let's go with X", "we'll use Y", "choosing Z" |

| Trade-off discussions | "X vs Y", "pros/cons", "considering alternatives" |

| Problem-solution pairs | "the problem is... so we'll..." |

Extraction Rules

Explicit Tags (Guaranteed Inclusion)

Text marked with `[ADR]` is always extracted:

[ADR] Using PostgreSQL for user data storage due to ACID requirements

These receive `confidence: "high"` automatically.

AI-Detected Decisions

Patterns detected without explicit tags require confidence assessment:

| Confidence | Criteria |

|------------|----------|

| **high** | Clear statement of choice with rationale |

| **medium** | Implied decision from action taken |

| **low** | Contextual inference, may need verification |

Output Format

{
  "decisions": [
    {
      "title": "Use PostgreSQL for user data",
      "problem": "Need ACID transactions for financial records",
      "chosen_option": "PostgreSQL",
      "alternatives_discussed": ["MongoDB", "SQLite"],
      "drivers": ["ACID compliance", "team familiarity"],
      "confidence": "high",
      "source_context": "Discussion about database selection in planning phase"
    }
  ]
}

Field Definitions

| Field | Required | Description |

|-------|----------|-------------|

| `title` | Yes | Concise decision summary |

| `problem` | Yes | Problem or context driving the decision |

| `chosen_option` | Yes | The selected solution or approach |

| `alternatives_discussed` | No | Other options mentioned (empty array if none) |

| `drivers` | No | Factors influencing the decision |

| `confidence` | Yes | `high`, `medium`, or `low` |

| `source_context` | No | Brief description of where decision appeared |

Extraction Workflow

1. **Scan for explicit markers** - Find all `[ADR]` tagged content

2. **Identify choice patterns** - Look for decision language

3. **Extract trade-off discussions** - Capture alternatives and reasoning

4. **Assess confidence** - Rate each non-explicit decision

5. **Capture context** - Note surrounding discussion for ADR writer

Pattern Examples

High Confidence

"We decided to use Redis for caching because of its sub-millisecond latency
and native TTL support. Memcached was considered but lacks persistence."

Extracts:

Medium Confidence

"Let's go with TypeScript for the frontend since we're already using it
in the backend."

Extracts:

Low Confidence

"The API seems to be working well with REST endpoints."

Extracts:

Best Practices

Context Capture

Always capture sufficient context for the ADR writer:

Merge Related Decisions

If multiple statements relate to the same decision, consolidate them:

Flag Ambiguity

When decisions are unclear or contradictory:

When to Use This Skill