Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsBlogPro
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges
  • Chrome Extension
  • Skill Manager

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Create Decision

ASecurity

Record an architectural or implementation decision with context, alternatives considered, trade-offs, and consequences.

10 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 10/6/2026
code-qualitydatabase

Works with

cli

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 10/6/2026

$npx -y skills add tomzx/agents --skill create-decision --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Create Decision?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Create Decision
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/tomzx-create-decision/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/tomzx-create-decision)

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

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: create-decision
description: Record an architectural or implementation decision with context, alternatives considered, trade-offs, and consequences.
argument-hint: "[decision topic or question]"
---

# Create Decision

Records a decision made during implementation as a lightweight Architecture Decision Record (ADR).
Captures the context, the decision, alternatives considered, trade-offs, and expected consequences so future contributors understand why the code is the way it is.

## Prerequisites

- Apply the shared SDLC conventions in `skills/sdlc/references/shared.md`.
- A concrete decision that was made (or needs to be made) during implementation
- Enough context to explain the forces that shaped the decision

## Steps

1. Identify the decision: what question was answered or choice was made.
2. Describe the context: what problem exists, what constraints apply, what prompted the decision.
3. List the options that were considered (at least two, including the chosen one).
4. State the decision clearly.
5. Explain the trade-offs: what is gained and what is sacrificed.
6. Describe the consequences: what changes as a result, what follow-up is expected.
7. Save the document to `.sdlc/knowledge/decisions/` (or the project's existing ADR directory if one exists) using the filename pattern `N-<slug>.md` where `N` is the next available number (counting existing files in that directory).

If this decision replaces an earlier one, run `/supersede-decision <old> <new>` afterwards to mark the prior ADR `Superseded by [N]` and record the reverse link. Do not hand-edit the older decision's status.

## Output Format

Use the template at `skills/sdlc/templates/knowledge/decision.md` (copied to `.sdlc/templates/knowledge/decision.md` by `/initialize-sdlc-directory`; use the project's customized copy if present). Write the result to the artifact path named in the steps above.

## Outcome

If `$OUTCOME_YAML` is set, emit `verdict: approved` there per `skills/sdlc/references/shared.md` once the record is written.
In the same emission, list the artifact under `artifacts:` (`.sdlc/knowledge/decisions/N-<slug>.md`, or the project's existing ADR directory when one is used).

## Example Usage

**Scenario 1: Library choice**
Deciding between two HTTP client libraries during implementation.
Decision title: "Use httpx instead of requests for async support."
Context: the service needs to make concurrent outbound calls; `requests` blocks.
Option A (httpx): supports async/await natively, actively maintained. Con: adds a new dependency.
Option B (requests + threads): familiar but increases thread overhead.
Decision: use httpx. Consequence: all HTTP calls must use async context.

**Scenario 2: Data modeling trade-off**
Deciding whether to store computed values or recalculate on read.
Decision title: "Persist derived totals in the orders table."
Context: query load is high, recalculation is expensive.
Trade-off: gained query speed, sacrificed single source of truth (must keep totals in sync on write).

**Scenario 3: Deferring complexity**
Choosing a simple approach now and noting what was deferred.
Decision title: "Use a flat file for config instead of a database."
Consequence: revisit if config grows beyond 50 keys or requires per-user values.

## Completion Checklist

Before handing off to review, confirm:

- [ ] At least two options considered (including the chosen one), each with pros and cons
- [ ] If it replaces an earlier decision, `/supersede-decision` was run (do not hand-edit the older status)

Self-check the record against the [`review-decision` checklist](../review-decision/SKILL.md) and fix what you can, so review finds less to flag.

## Next Step

A review subagent is dispatched automatically to run `/review-decision` to audit the record for clarity, completeness, reasoning quality, and consequence coverage.

Attribution

tomzxtomzx
View sourceSee grades on GitHubMore from tomzx →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Ship a skill? Prove it's safe.

Free 120-pattern security scan, letter grade, and an embeddable README badge.

Submit a skill

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 (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Ship a skill? Prove it's safe.

Free 120-pattern security scan, letter grade, and an embeddable README badge.

Submit a skill

Related Skills

Caveman Review

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

1100021 votes

Caveman Commit

Ultra-compressed commit message generator. Cuts noise from commit messages while preserving intent and reasoning. Conventional Commits format. Subject ≤50 chars, body only when "why" isn't obvious. Use when user says "write a commit", "commit message", "generate commit", "/commit", or invokes /caveman-commit. Auto-triggers when staging changes.

1100021 votes

Springboot Verification

Verification loop for Spring Boot projects: build, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and diff review before release or PR.

2456590 votes

Verification Loop

一个全面的 Claude Code 会话验证系统。

2456590 votes

Django Verification

Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or PR.

2456590 votes
View all in code-quality →