Skip to content
Back to skills

Govkit Adr Author

ASecurity

Author an Architecture Decision Record for a new pattern, exception, or boundary change. Use when the user asks to write an ADR or invokes /govkit-adr-author.

  • 20 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 27, 2026
developmentgoapisecurity

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 27, 2026

npx -y skills add Accelerated-Innovation/governed-ai-delivery --skill govkit-adr-author --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Govkit Adr Author?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Govkit Adr Author
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/accelerated-innovation-govkit-adr-author/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/accelerated-innovation-govkit-adr-author)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: govkit-adr-author
description: Author an Architecture Decision Record for a new pattern, exception, or boundary change. Use when the user asks to write an ADR or invokes /govkit-adr-author.
---

# ADR Author

You are writing an Architecture Decision Record (ADR). Determine the ADR title from the user's request; if it is not provided, ask before proceeding.

Follow the template at `docs/{{docs_area}}/architecture/ADR/TEMPLATE.md`. Produce a complete ADR using these sections:

## Title

Short, action-oriented statement describing the decision.

## Context

- What triggered this decision?
- What is the current architecture?
- What constraints or standards are being revisited?
- Which specs or plans does this relate to?

## Decision

- What are we changing, introducing, or formalizing?
- What boundaries or dependencies are affected?

## Status

Write `Proposed`. Never write `Accepted`.

`Accepted` is a derived state, not a word an author types. It is true because an
approver named in `governance/approval_policy.yaml` approved *this decision* at
*this commit* — the `adr-approval-check` CI gate verifies exactly that, and fails
a pull request whose ADR claims `Accepted` without it. `Rejected` and
`Superseded` are recorded by whoever makes that call, not by you.

## Consequences

- Positive: expected benefits
- Negative: tradeoffs (latency, failure points, cost, complexity)

## Alternatives Considered

Top 2 alternatives and why they were rejected.

## Impacted Modules

Layers or services that must change. Flag any migration, deprecation, or compatibility work.

## Compliance Notes

Does this violate any part of `ARCH_CONTRACT.md`, `BOUNDARIES.md`, `SECURITY_AUTH_PATTERNS.md`, or `API_CONVENTIONS.md`? If yes, state why and who approved the exception.

## Review

Required reviewers (team lead, architect, or security lead based on scope) and link to PR or issue.

Naming someone here *requests* a decision; it does not record one. A reviewer assesses evidence or content; only an approver listed in `governance/approval_policy.yaml` commits the decision, and only their approving review — bound to the head commit — makes the ADR Accepted. Leave no signature, date, or approver name here as though the decision were already made.

---

Write the ADR to `docs/{{docs_area}}/architecture/ADR/<slug>.md` with status `Proposed`. If required information is missing, stop and ask before drafting.

Implementation of a dependent feature waits until the ADR is Accepted. That is something you observe — `govkit validate` reports ADRs claiming it without provenance, and `adr-approval-check` proves it — never something you assert by editing the status line.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.