ReddRadar
Agent skill
adr-decision-extraction
Extract architectural decisions from conversations. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off discussions, and explicit choices. Use when analyzing session transcripts for ADR generation.
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/existential-birds/beagle/tree/main/plugins/beagle-analysis/skills/adr-decision-extraction
SKILL.md
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
- Scan for explicit markers - Find all
[ADR]tagged content - Identify choice patterns - Look for decision language
- Extract trade-off discussions - Capture alternatives and reasoning
- Assess confidence - Rate each non-explicit decision
- 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:
- Title: Use Redis for caching
- Problem: Need fast caching with TTL
- Chosen: Redis
- Alternatives: Memcached
- Drivers: sub-millisecond latency, native TTL, persistence
- Confidence: high
Medium Confidence
"Let's go with TypeScript for the frontend since we're already using it
in the backend."
Extracts:
- Title: Use TypeScript for frontend
- Problem: Language choice for frontend
- Chosen: TypeScript
- Alternatives: (none stated)
- Drivers: consistency with backend
- Confidence: medium
Low Confidence
"The API seems to be working well with REST endpoints."
Extracts:
- Title: REST API architecture
- Problem: API design approach
- Chosen: REST
- Alternatives: (none stated)
- Drivers: (none stated)
- Confidence: low
Best Practices
Context Capture
Always capture sufficient context for the ADR writer:
- What was the discussion about?
- Who was involved (if known)?
- What prompted the decision?
Merge Related Decisions
If multiple statements relate to the same decision, consolidate them:
- Combine alternatives from different mentions
- Aggregate drivers
- Use highest confidence level
Flag Ambiguity
When decisions are unclear or contradictory:
- Note the ambiguity in
source_context - Set confidence to
low - Include all interpretations if multiple exist
When to Use This Skill
- Analyzing session transcripts for ADR generation
- Reviewing conversation history for documentation
- Extracting decisions from design discussions
- Preparing input for ADR writing tools
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
existential-birds/beagle
review-python
Comprehensive Python/FastAPI backend code review with optional parallel agents
existential-birds/beagle
review-verification-protocol
Mandatory verification steps for all code reviews to reduce false positives. Load this skill before reporting ANY code review findings.
existential-birds/beagle
sqlalchemy-code-review
Reviews SQLAlchemy code for session management, relationships, N+1 queries, and migration patterns. Use when reviewing SQLAlchemy 2.0 code, checking session lifecycle, relationship() usage, or Alembic migrations.
existential-birds/beagle
fastapi-code-review
Reviews FastAPI code for routing patterns, dependency injection, validation, and async handlers. Use when reviewing FastAPI apps, checking APIRouter setup, Depends() usage, or response models.
existential-birds/beagle
pytest-code-review
Reviews pytest test code for async patterns, fixtures, parametrize, and mocking. Use when reviewing test_*.py files, checking async test functions, fixture usage, or mock patterns.
existential-birds/beagle
postgres-code-review
Reviews PostgreSQL code for indexing strategies, JSONB operations, connection pooling, and transaction safety. Use when reviewing SQL queries, database schemas, JSONB usage, or connection management.
Didn't find tool you were looking for?