Claude-skill-registry architecture-decisions
Make and document architecture decisions using structured frameworks
install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/architecture-decisions" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-architecture-decisions && rm -rf "$T"
manifest:
skills/data/architecture-decisions/SKILL.mdsource content
Architecture Decisions Skill
Purpose
Enable structured architecture decision-making through quality attribute analysis, trade-off evaluation, and technology selection using industry-standard frameworks.
Parameters
| Parameter | Type | Required | Validation | Default |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| string | ✅ | min: 30 chars | - |
| enum | ⚪ | technology|pattern|tradeoff | |
| array | ⚪ | max: 5 items | |
| object | ⚪ | valid JSON | |
| array | ⚪ | min: 2 items | - |
Execution Flow
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 1. VALIDATE: Check input parameters │ │ 2. CONTEXTUALIZE: Understand problem domain │ │ 3. IDENTIFY: List quality attributes and constraints │ │ 4. ANALYZE: Evaluate options against criteria │ │ 5. SCORE: Create decision matrix │ │ 6. RECOMMEND: Provide primary + alternatives │ │ 7. DOCUMENT: Generate ADR content │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Retry Logic
| Error | Retry | Backoff | Max Attempts |
|---|---|---|---|
| No | - | 1 |
| Yes | 1s, 2s, 4s | 3 |
| Yes | - | 2 |
Logging & Observability
log_points: - event: skill_invoked level: info data: [decision_type, quality_priorities] - event: analysis_complete level: info data: [options_count, top_recommendation] - event: error_occurred level: error data: [error_type, context] metrics: - name: decision_time_ms type: histogram - name: options_evaluated type: counter - name: confidence_score type: gauge
Error Handling
| Error Code | Description | Recovery |
|---|---|---|
| Missing decision context | Request clarification |
| Conflicting quality attributes | Prioritization dialog |
| Insufficient options to compare | Request more alternatives |
| Unknown technology domain | Defer to research |
Unit Test Template
test_cases: - name: "Database selection decision" input: decision_context: "E-commerce order management system" decision_type: "technology" quality_priorities: ["reliability", "performance"] options: ["PostgreSQL", "MongoDB"] expected: has_recommendation: true has_rationale: true confidence_gte: 0.7 - name: "Missing context error" input: decision_context: "" expected: error_code: "E001" - name: "Microservices vs Monolith" input: decision_context: "Startup MVP with 4 developers" decision_type: "pattern" quality_priorities: ["deployability", "maintainability"] expected: has_trade_offs: true alternatives_count_gte: 1
Troubleshooting
Common Issues
| Symptom | Root Cause | Resolution |
|---|---|---|
| Vague recommendation | Context too broad | Narrow scope, add constraints |
| Analysis paralysis | Too many options | Limit to top 3-4 viable options |
| Low confidence score | Missing information | Request specific metrics/requirements |
Debug Checklist
□ Is problem domain clearly defined? □ Are quality attributes prioritized? □ Are all options technically viable? □ Are constraints explicitly stated? □ Is success criteria measurable?
Examples
Example: Technology Selection
Input: decision_context: "Real-time inventory system for retail" decision_type: "technology" quality_priorities: ["performance", "scalability"] options: ["Redis", "PostgreSQL", "MongoDB"] Output: recommendation: "Redis for hot data + PostgreSQL for persistence" confidence: 0.85 trade_offs: - "Redis: Fast but requires cache invalidation strategy" - "PostgreSQL: ACID compliant but higher latency" adr_content: | # ADR: Hybrid Redis + PostgreSQL for Inventory ## Decision: Use Redis for real-time inventory counts, PostgreSQL for order data ## Rationale: Balances performance needs with data durability
Integration
| Component | Trigger | Data Flow |
|---|---|---|
| Agent 01 | Decision request | Receives context, returns recommendation |
| Agent 02 | ADR creation | Provides decision content for documentation |
Quality Standards
- Atomic: Single decision per invocation
- Traceable: All decisions link to rationale
- Reversible: Document rollback strategy when applicable
Version History
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 2.0.0 | 2025-01 | Production-grade: parameters, retry logic, tests |
| 1.0.0 | 2024-12 | Initial release |