
The create-architectural-decision-record skill generates formatted Architectural Decision Record (ADR) documents that capture technical decisions with structured sections for context, chosen solutions, consequences, and alternatives. It serves software architects and engineering teams who need to document and communicate major architectural choices in a standardized format optimized for both human review and machine parsing. The skill solves the problem of inconsistent decision documentation by enforcing a consistent template with coded bullet points, front matter metadata, and mandatory sections that ensure decisions are thoroughly reasoned and discoverable.
$ npx -y skills add github/awesome-copilot --skill create-architectural-decision-record --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Create an ADR document for ${input:DecisionTitle} using structured formatting optimized for AI consumption and human readability.
${input:Context}${input:Decision}${input:Alternatives}${input:Stakeholders}If any of the required inputs are not provided or cannot be determined from the conversation history, ask the user to provide the missing information before proceeding with ADR generation.
The ADR must be saved in the /docs/adr/ directory using the naming convention: adr-NNNN-[title-slug].md, where NNNN is the next sequential 4-digit number (e.g., adr-0001-database-selection.md).
The documentation file must follow the template below, ensuring that all sections are filled out appropriately. The front matter for the markdown should be structured correctly as per the example following:
---
title: "ADR-NNNN: [Decision Title]"
status: "Proposed"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
authors: "[Stakeholder Names/Roles]"
tags: ["architecture", "decision"]
supersedes: ""
superseded_by: ""
---
# ADR-NNNN: [Decision Title]
## Status
**Proposed** | Accepted | Rejected | Superseded | Deprecated
## Context
[Problem statement, technical constraints, business requirements, and environmental factors requiring this decision.]
## Decision
[Chosen solution with clear rationale for selection.]
## Consequences
### Positive
- **POS-001**: [Beneficial outcomes and advantages]
- **POS-002**: [Performance, maintainability, scalability improvements]
- **POS-003**: [Alignment with architectural principles]
### Negative
- **NEG-001**: [Trade-offs, limitations, drawbacks]
- **NEG-002**: [Technical debt or complexity introduced]
- **NEG-003**: [Risks and future challenges]
## Alternatives Considered
### [Alternative 1 Name]
- **ALT-001**: **Description**: [Brief technical description]
- **ALT-002**: **Rejection Reason**: [Why this option was not selected]
### [Alternative 2 Name]
- **ALT-003**: **Description**: [Brief technical description]
- **ALT-004**: **Rejection Reason**: [Why this option was not selected]
## Implementation Notes
- **IMP-001**: [Key implementation considerations]
- **IMP-002**: [Migration or rollout strategy if applicable]
- **IMP-003**: [Monitoring and success criteria]
## References
- **REF-001**: [Related ADRs]
- **REF-002**: [External documentation]
- **REF-003**: [Standards or frameworks referenced]
Sponsors