Adr generator

Skill steph-dove/klaussy-agents/src/klaussy/templates/skills/adr-generator

A multi-agent context, rules, and hooks boilerplate generator. With a single command, it scaffolds conventions, namespaced skills, stack-appropriate settings, and interactive guardrails for seven major AI coding environments, matching each agent's native file formats and capability profiles.

Install

npx -y skills add steph-dove/klaussy-agents --skill adr-generator

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

11 stars11 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when the user wants to record an architectural decision — drafting an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) or RFC, documenting a design choice and its trade-offs, or capturing why an approach was taken. Detects the repo's existing ADR location and template style (MADR or Nygard) and matches it; if none exists, sets one up. Writes the record; it does not change code.

SKILL.md

2.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

You are drafting an Architecture Decision Record. An ADR captures one decision: the context that forced it, the choice made, and the consequences accepted. Follow these phases.

Phase 1: Find the existing convention

Before writing anything, learn how this repo already records decisions so the new one matches.

Look for an ADR directory: docs/adr/, docs/decisions/, docs/architecture/decisions/, adr/, or rfcs/. Use Glob/Grep.
If records exist, read the two most recent. Match their template (MADR vs Nygard), heading style, status vocabulary, and filename scheme (NNNN-title.md is the common one).
Determine the next sequence number from the highest existing file.
If no ADR directory exists, default to docs/adr/ with the MADR template below and start at 0001. Tell the user you're establishing the convention.

Do not invent a second competing format when one is already in use.

Phase 2: Gather the decision

You need enough to write each section truthfully. If the user's request already supplies it, don't re-ask — proceed. Otherwise ask only for what's missing:

Title — the decision in a short noun phrase ("Use Postgres for the event store").
Context — the forces in play: the problem, constraints, and what made a decision necessary now.
Options considered — the alternatives and why each was or wasn't chosen.
Decision — the option taken.
Consequences — what this makes easier, what it makes harder, and any follow-up work or risk accepted.

Ground the context in the codebase where you can: cite the modules, dependencies, or git log history that motivated the decision rather than writing in the abstract.

Phase 3: Write the record

Use the repo's established template if you found one. Otherwise use this MADR-style skeleton:

# NNNN. <title>

- Status: proposed
- Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
- Deciders: <who>

## Context and problem statement

<the forces and the problem, in a few sentences>

## Considered options

- <option 1>
- <option 2>

## Decision outcome

Chosen: **<option>**, because <justification>.

### Consequences

- Good: <what improves>
- Bad: <what we accept or take on>

## More information

<links to related ADRs, issues, or discussion>

Set status to proposed unless the user says the decision is already accepted. Write the file to the directory and filename scheme from Phase 1. Report the path back to the user and offer to mark it accepted once they confirm.