Agent skill
write-adr
Generate ADRs from decisions made in the current session. Extracts decisions, confirms with user, writes MADR-formatted documents.
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/existential-birds/beagle/tree/main/plugins/beagle-analysis/skills/write-adr
SKILL.md
Write ADR
Generate Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) from decisions made during the current session.
Workflow Overview
- Context - Gather repository context and existing ADRs
- Extract - Analyze conversation for decisions using a subagent
- Confirm - Present decisions to user for selection
- Write - Generate ADRs in parallel using subagents
- Report - Summarize created files and status
- Verify - Validate generated ADRs against Definition of Done
Step 1: Gather Context
# Get current branch and recent commits
git branch --show-current
git log --oneline -5
# Check for existing ADRs
ls docs/adrs/ 2>/dev/null || echo "No ADR directory found"
# Count existing ADRs for numbering
find docs/adrs -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l
This context helps the ADR writer:
- Reference related commits in the ADR
- Avoid duplicate ADRs for already-documented decisions
- Determine correct sequence numbering
Step 2: Extract Decisions
Launch a subagent to analyze the current conversation for architectural decisions:
Task(
description: "Analyze conversation and extract architectural decisions",
model: "sonnet",
prompt: |
Load the skill: Skill(skill: "beagle-analysis:adr-decision-extraction")
Analyze the conversation for decisions that warrant ADRs:
- Technology choices, architecture patterns, design trade-offs
- Rejected alternatives, significant implementation approaches
Return JSON:
{
"decisions": [
{
"id": 1,
"title": "Use PostgreSQL for primary datastore",
"context": "Brief context about why this came up",
"decision": "What was decided",
"alternatives": ["What was considered but rejected"],
"rationale": "Why this choice was made"
}
]
}
)
If the subagent returns an empty decisions array, skip to Step 5 with message: "No architectural decisions detected in this session."
Step 3: Confirm with User
Display all extracted decisions with full details, then ask user to select:
## Detected Decisions
### 1. Use PostgreSQL for primary datastore
**Confidence:** high
**Problem:** Need ACID transactions for financial records
**Decision:** PostgreSQL for user data storage
**Alternatives discussed:**
- MongoDB
- SQLite
**Rationale:** ACID compliance, team familiarity, mature ecosystem
**Source:** Discussion about database selection in planning phase
---
### 2. Implement event sourcing for audit trail
**Confidence:** medium
**Problem:** Compliance requires complete audit history
**Decision:** Event sourcing pattern for state changes
**Alternatives discussed:**
- Database triggers
- Application-level logging
**Rationale:** Immutable audit trail, temporal queries, debugging capability
**Source:** Compliance requirements discussion
---
## Selection
Which decisions should I write ADRs for?
- Enter numbers (e.g., "1,2" or "1-2"), "all", or "none" to skip
Important: Always display the full decision details (problem, decision, alternatives, rationale) from the extraction output BEFORE asking for selection. Do not truncate to just title and context.
Parse user response:
"all"- Process all decisions"none"or empty - Skip with message "No ADRs will be created.""1,2"or"1-2"- Process specified decisions
Step 4: Write ADRs (Parallel)
Pre-allocate ADR numbers before launching subagents to prevent numbering conflicts:
# Pre-allocate numbers for all confirmed decisions
# Example: If user selected 3 decisions
python skills/adr-writing/scripts/next_adr_number.py --count 3
# Output:
# 0003
# 0004
# 0005
Assign each pre-allocated number to its corresponding decision before launching subagents.
For each confirmed decision, launch an ADR Writer subagent in background with its pre-assigned number:
Task(
description: "Write ADR for: {decision.title}",
model: "sonnet",
run_in_background: true,
prompt: |
Load the skill: Skill(skill: "beagle-analysis:adr-writing")
Write an ADR for this decision:
```json
{decision JSON}
```
**IMPORTANT: Use this pre-assigned ADR number: {assigned_number}**
Instructions:
1. Explore codebase for additional context
2. Write MADR-formatted ADR to docs/adr/
3. Use the pre-assigned number {assigned_number} - DO NOT call next_adr_number.py
4. Filename format: {assigned_number}-slugified-title.md
5. Return created file path
)
Critical: Pass the pre-allocated number to each subagent. Subagents must NOT call next_adr_number.py themselves - this causes duplicate numbers when running in parallel.
All subagents run in parallel. Wait for all to complete before proceeding.
Step 5: Report Results
Collect outputs from all subagents and present summary:
## ADR Generation Complete
| File | Decision | Status |
|------|----------|--------|
| docs/adr/0003-use-postgresql.md | Use PostgreSQL for primary datastore | Draft |
### Next Steps
- Review generated ADRs for accuracy
- Update status from "proposed" to "accepted" when finalized
### Gaps Requiring Investigation
- [List any decisions where subagent noted missing context]
If no decisions were processed:
No ADRs were created. Run this command again after making architectural decisions.
Step 6: Verify Generated ADRs
For each created ADR, validate against Definition of Done:
## Verification Checklist
| ADR | E | C | A | D | R | Status |
|-----|---|---|---|---|---|--------|
| 0003-use-postgresql.md | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ⚠ | ✗ | Incomplete |
Legend: E=Evidence, C=Criteria, A=Agreement, D=Documentation, R=Realization
Verification steps:
- Open each generated ADR file
- Confirm filename follows
NNNN-slugified-title.mdpattern - Verify YAML frontmatter exists at file start:
- File MUST begin with
--- - Contains
status: draft(or valid status) - Contains
date: YYYY-MM-DD(actual date) - Ends with
---before title - If frontmatter is missing, add it immediately
- File MUST begin with
- Review for
[INVESTIGATE]prompts - these need follow-up - Verify at least 2 alternatives are documented
- Confirm consequences section has both Good and Bad items
If gaps exist:
- Keep status as
draftuntil gaps are resolved - Use
[INVESTIGATE]prompts to guide follow-up session - Schedule review with stakeholders before changing to
accepted
Output Location
ADRs are written to docs/adr/. If no ADR directory exists, create it with an initial 0000-use-madr.md template record.
MADR Format Reference
---
status: draft
date: YYYY-MM-DD
---
# {TITLE}
## Context and Problem Statement
{What is the issue motivating this decision?}
## Decision Drivers
* {driver 1}
* {driver 2}
## Decision Outcome
Chosen option: "{option}", because {reason}.
### Consequences
* Good, because {positive}
* Bad, because {negative}
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
review-python
Comprehensive Python/FastAPI backend code review with optional parallel agents
review-verification-protocol
Mandatory verification steps for all code reviews to reduce false positives. Load this skill before reporting ANY code review findings.
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.
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.
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.
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?