Agent skill

Architect Specify

by tikalk in tikalk/adlc-team-skills

A skill your agent uses when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting.

MITAuto-check passedDevelopment

Install Architect Specify

skills CLI
$ npx skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-specify -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install tikalk/adlc-team-skills architect-specify --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tikalk/adlc-team-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/architect/architect-specify .claude/skills/architect-specify && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
architect-specify
GitHub stars
141
Token cost
~6.4k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,259 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
44
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

A skill your agent uses when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting.

  • Works in 6 steps: Sub-System Detection (Greenfield) → PRD Analysis → Architectural Exploration (Interactive) → …
  • You want guided trade-off analysis
  • SKILL.md covers What this skill does, When to use, Process and Next Steps, plus 1 more section
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Architect Specify is an agent skill from tikalk/adlc-team-skills. Use when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting. Optional for routine capture — team-boot writes lightweight ADR drafts directly.

Its SKILL.md is about 6.4k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Development, covering Architecture decision records. The repository describes itself as: Agent skills for the Agentic SDLC: team lifecycle (team-boot, team-learn, team-init, team-repair), software factory, evals, CDR lifecycle with confidence scoring, and… The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • You want guided trade-off analysis
  • Multi-option comparison
  • Structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting

Example prompts

  • “/architect-specify”

Workflow steps

6 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Sub-System Detection (Greenfield)
  2. PRD Analysis
  3. Architectural Exploration (Interactive)
  4. Decision Documentation
  5. 5: Quality Requirements Exploration (Optional)
  6. ADR Output

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 2dbed36. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are markdown and json).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Architect Specify loads about 6.4k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 60 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,259 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~60
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~6.4k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from tikalk/adlc-team-skills at commit 2dbed36, republished under its MIT licence (© tikalk). 2,259 words, ~6,377 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/architect-specify/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
architect-specify
description
Use when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting. Optional for routine capture — team-boot writes lightweight ADR drafts directly.
disable-model-invocation
true

architect-specify

What this skill does

Transform a PRD (Product Requirements Document) or high-level system description into well-documented Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) through interactive exploration and trade-off analysis.

Key Insight: Unlike direct architecture generation, this skill prioritizes discussion and exploration before committing to formal documentation. The goal is to surface trade-offs, validate assumptions, and make informed decisions collaboratively.

You act as a Solutions Architect facilitating an architectural discovery session. Your role involves:

  • Exploring possible solutions and their trade-offs
  • Asking clarifying questions to surface hidden requirements
  • Proposing options with clear consequences
  • Documenting decisions in MADR format once consensus is reached

When to use

Note: Routine decision capture is handled by team-boot's continuous capture mechanism, which writes lightweight drafts directly to .adlc/drafts/. This skill is for interactive deep-dive exploration — when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured decision facilitation before documenting.

  • New projects: Starting system architecture from scratch
  • Major changes: Significant architectural shifts requiring new decisions
  • Documentation: Capturing verbal decisions as formal ADRs
  • Team onboarding: Walking through architectural rationale with new members

When NOT to use:

  • Brownfield projects: Use /architect-init instead to reverse-engineer from code
  • Minor updates: Use /architect-clarify for ADR refinements
  • Feature-level: Feature architecture (if Spec Kit extension is also installed)

Process

User Input
text
$ARGUMENTS

You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).

Examples of User Input:

  • "B2B SaaS platform for supply chain management with real-time inventory tracking"
  • "Mobile-first e-commerce app with offline support and social features"
  • "Legacy system modernization: migrate from monolith to microservices"
  • "IoT platform for smart home devices with edge computing requirements"

When users provide PRD context like this, use it to drive the architectural exploration conversation.

Flags
  • --views VIEWS: Architecture views to include in final AD.md

    • core (default): Context, Functional, Information, Development, Deployment
    • all: All 7 views including Concurrency and Operational
    • Custom: comma-separated (e.g., concurrency,operational)
  • --adr-heuristic HEURISTIC: ADR generation strategy

    • surprising (default): Skip obvious ecosystem defaults
    • all: Document all decisions discussed
    • minimal: Only high-risk/unconventional decisions
  • --no-decompose: Disable automatic sub-system decomposition (default: auto-decompose if multiple domains detected)

Role & Context

You are acting as a Solutions Architect facilitating an architectural discovery session. Your role involves:

  • Exploring possible solutions and their trade-offs
  • Asking clarifying questions to surface hidden requirements
  • Proposing options with clear consequences
  • Documenting decisions in MADR format once consensus is reached
Rozanski & Woods Alignment

When creating ADRs, consider how they map to R&W viewpoints:

ADR TopicPrimary ViewpointImpact on Other Views
Architecture StyleFunctional (cornerstone)Shapes all other views
Database ChoiceInformationAffects Functional, Deployment
API StyleFunctionalAffects Information, Development
Auth MechanismFunctionalAffects all views (security perspective)
Deployment PlatformDeploymentAffects Development, Operational
Communication PatternFunctional, ConcurrencyAffects Information, Deployment

Functional-as-Cornerstone Principle:

"The Functional view is the cornerstone of most ADs... It usually drives the shape of other system structures." — Rozanski & Woods

During exploration, prioritize decisions that affect the Functional view:

  1. System architecture style (monolith/microservices/serverless)
  2. Component responsibilities and boundaries
  3. Interface contracts between components
  4. Integration patterns

These decisions drive all subsequent architectural views.

Two-Level Architecture System
LevelLocationADR FileArchitecture Description
SystemMain branch{REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/{REPO_ROOT}/AD.md

This command operates at the System level, creating ADRs in {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ADR-{NNN}.md.

IMPORTANT - Path Resolution:

  • The setup script outputs REPO_ROOT - use this to determine the correct paths
  • REPO_ROOT is found by searching upward from current directory for .adlc directory
  • NEVER use relative paths like .adlc/drafts/adr.md - always use {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ADR-{NNN}.md
  • The setup script auto-generates adr.md and the adr.md index after ADR writes
  • When running from a subdirectory (e.g., a subproject directory), .adlc may be in the parent directory
Outline

Given the PRD input, execute this workflow:

  1. Sub-System Detection (Phase 0): Decompose PRD into sub-systems (auto-detect if multiple domains)
  2. Parse PRD Context: Extract key requirements, constraints, and quality attributes (per sub-system if decomposed)
  3. Load Governance: Check {REPO_ROOT}/docs/adlc/memory/constitution.md (legacy {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/memory/constitution.md fallback — ADR-401 dual-read) for architectural constraints
  4. Exploration Phase: Interactive discussion to surface trade-offs and options (per sub-system)
  5. Decision Phase: Document decisions as ADRs with full rationale (organized by sub-system)
  6. Output: Write ADRs to {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ADR-{NNN}.md with sub-system organization

NOTE: This is an interactive command. You will engage the user in conversation before finalizing ADRs.

Execution Steps
Phase 0: Sub-System Detection (Greenfield)

Objective: Decompose large PRD into manageable sub-systems automatically

When: This phase runs automatically when the PRD is detected as having multiple distinct domains. Use --no-decompose to skip.

Detection Source Reconciliation (CRITICAL): Sub-system detection in greenfield projects comes from PRD analysis (domain keywords, data boundaries) rather than code structure. When analyzing the PRD:

  • Identify domains from keywords, requirements, and user flows
  • ALWAYS execute Step 3 when you identify 4+ sub-systems
  • NEVER default to monolithic if the PRD describes multiple distinct domains
  • The threshold logic applies regardless of whether domains come from explicit PRD sections or inferred from requirements
Step 1: Domain Analysis

Analyze the PRD for distinct business domains and functional areas:

Domain CategoryTypical Keywords
Authenticationlogin, auth, oauth, sso, permissions, roles, access control
User Managementprofile, registration, preferences, settings, account
Paymentsbilling, checkout, subscription, invoicing, pricing
Orderscart, checkout, order management, fulfillment
Inventorystock, warehouse, products, catalog, sku
Notificationsemail, sms, push, alerts, webhooks
Analyticsmetrics, reporting, dashboards, data
Searchsearch, indexing, elasticsearch
Mediaupload, images, video, cdn
Messagingchat, realtime, websocket
Step 2: Boundary Detection

Identify boundaries between sub-systems based on:

  1. Data Ownership: What data belongs to which domain?
  2. Team Boundaries: Are different teams responsible for different areas?
  3. Deployment Independence: Can sub-systems be deployed separately?
  4. Integration Points: How do sub-systems communicate?
Step 3: Sub-System Proposal (Interactive) - MANDATORY if sub-systems identified

Present detected sub-systems to user for confirmation:

markdown
## Detected Sub-Systems

I've identified the following sub-systems from your PRD:

| # | Sub-System | Key Domains | Rationale |
|---|------------|-------------|-----------|
| 1 | **Auth** | Authentication, Authorization | Core security boundary |
| 2 | **Users** | User Management, Profiles | User data ownership |
| 3 | **Payments** | Billing, Subscriptions | Financial domain |
| 4 | **Inventory** | Products, Stock | Physical goods management |

### Questions for Confirmation:

1. **Are these sub-systems correct?** [Y/n]
2. **Should any sub-systems be merged?** (e.g., Auth + Users)
3. **Should any sub-systems be split?** (e.g., Payments into Billing + Subscriptions)
4. **Any missing sub-systems?** (e.g., Analytics, Search)

**Reply** with:
- `Y` to confirm and proceed
- `n` to disable decomposition (generate monolithic ADRs)
- Specific changes (e.g., "merge 1+2", "split 3", "add Notifications")

CRITICAL: If you have identified ANY sub-systems through PRD analysis, you MUST execute this step.

  • Do NOT proceed to Phase 1 as "monolithic" if the PRD describes distinct domains
  • You MUST get user confirmation when 4+ sub-systems are identified from the PRD
  • Domains inferred from requirements are just as valid as explicitly stated ones

Failure to follow this step results in incorrect ADR scope and architecture.

Step 4: Decomposition Decision

Based on user response:

ResponseAction
Y / EnterProceed with detected sub-systems
nSkip decomposition, generate monolithic ADRs
ModificationsAdjust sub-systems, then proceed
Empty/DefaultAuto-proceed if ≤3 sub-systems, ask if >3

Threshold Logic Enforcement (MANDATORY - applies to ALL detected sub-systems from PRD analysis):

Sub-System CountRequired ActionCan Skip User Confirmation?
0Proceed as monolithic (no decomposition)Yes
1-3Show summary, auto-approve allowedYes
4-6MUST show summary and ask user confirmationNO
>6MUST suggest grouping and MUST ask confirmationNO

Enforcement Rules:

  1. Domains inferred from PRD requirements count toward the threshold
  2. If threshold is 4+ → You MUST NOT proceed without user confirmation
  3. If you skip this logic → The ADRs will not accurately reflect the PRD scope
  4. Self-check before Phase 1: Did I present Step 3? Did I apply threshold logic? If 4+ sub-systems, did I get confirmation?
Step 5: Output

After confirmation, output structured sub-system data:

json
{
  "decomposition": "enabled",
  "subsystems": [
    {"id": "auth", "name": "Auth", "domains": ["Authentication", "Authorization"], "rationale": "Security boundary"},
    {"id": "users", "name": "Users", "domains": ["User Management", "Profiles"], "rationale": "User data ownership"},
    {"id": "payments", "name": "Payments", "domains": ["Billing", "Subscriptions"], "rationale": "Financial domain"}
  ],
  "next_phase": "PRD Analysis (per sub-system)"
}

If decomposition disabled:

json
{
  "decomposition": "disabled",
  "reason": "user_requested",
  "next_phase": "PRD Analysis (monolithic)"
}

Phase 1: PRD Analysis

Objective: Extract architectural drivers from the PRD

Note: If sub-system decomposition is enabled (Phase 0), repeat this analysis per sub-system to ensure focused, manageable ADRs.

  1. Identify Functional Drivers:

    • Core capabilities the system must provide
    • Key user interactions and workflows
    • Integration requirements with external systems
    • For sub-systems: Focus on the specific sub-system's responsibilities
  2. Identify Quality Attribute Drivers:

    • Performance requirements (latency, throughput)
    • Scalability expectations (users, data volume)
    • Availability/reliability targets
    • Security and compliance constraints
    • Maintainability and extensibility needs
  3. Identify Constraints:

    • Technology mandates or prohibitions
    • Budget and timeline constraints
    • Team skills and organizational factors
    • Regulatory or compliance requirements
  4. Load Constitution:

    • Read {REPO_ROOT}/docs/adlc/memory/constitution.md (legacy {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/memory/constitution.md fallback) if either exists
    • Extract architectural principles that must be honored
    • Note any constraints that limit architectural choices
  5. Check Existing Documentation:

    • Scan README.md for already-documented tech stack
    • Check AGENTS.md for project context
    • Check team directives: Run {REPO_ROOT}/.agents/skills/architect-clarify/scripts/bash/setup-architect.sh (Requires the architect-clarify skill: adlc-cli skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-clarify). and look for TEAM_AGENTS_MD in output - if present, this file contains usage instructions for team-wide agent directives
    • Review CONTRIBUTING.md for dev guidelines
    • Note: Don't duplicate - reference existing docs

Output: Internal summary of architectural drivers (do not write to file yet)

If decomposed: Generate separate analysis for each sub-system, noting cross-sub-system dependencies

Show full SKILL.md (905 more words)Show less
Phase 2: Architectural Exploration (Interactive)

Objective: Explore solution options through guided discussion

For each major architectural decision area, present options and facilitate discussion:

Decision Areas to Explore
  1. System Architecture Style

    • Monolith vs Microservices vs Modular Monolith
    • Event-driven vs Request-response
    • Serverless vs Traditional hosting
  2. Data Architecture

    • Database selection (SQL vs NoSQL vs Hybrid)
    • Data partitioning and scaling strategy
    • Caching approach
    • Event sourcing vs CRUD
  3. Integration Architecture

    • API style (REST vs GraphQL vs gRPC)
    • Async messaging patterns
    • Third-party integration approach
  4. Security Architecture

    • Authentication mechanism
    • Authorization model
    • Data protection strategy
  5. Deployment Architecture

    • Cloud provider selection
    • Container orchestration
    • CI/CD approach
Exploration Format

For each decision area requiring user input, present:

markdown
## Architectural Decision: [Decision Area]

**Context**: [Why this decision matters based on PRD]

**Options Being Considered**:

| Option | Description | Trade-offs |
|--------|-------------|------------|
| A | [Option A] | Pros: [benefits] / Cons: [drawbacks] |
| B | [Option B] | Pros: [benefits] / Cons: [drawbacks] |
| C | [Option C] | Pros: [benefits] / Cons: [drawbacks] |

**Recommended**: Option [X] - [Reasoning based on PRD requirements]

**Questions for Clarification**:
1. [Question about constraints or preferences]
2. [Question about trade-off priorities]

Reply with your choice (A/B/C), or provide additional context.
Exploration Rules
  • Present one decision area at a time to maintain focus
  • Always provide a recommended option with clear reasoning
  • Ask targeted questions to surface hidden requirements
  • Allow user to propose alternatives not in the initial options
  • After user responds, summarize the decision before moving to next area
  • Skip decisions that are already determined by PRD or constitution
  • Limit to 5-7 key decisions (defer less critical decisions)
Phase 3: Decision Documentation

Objective: Convert exploration outcomes into formal ADRs

CRITICAL: ADR status MUST be "Proposed" when generated by this command. NEVER set status to "Accepted" directly. Users must approve via /architect-clarify.

Note: If sub-system decomposition is enabled, organize ADRs by sub-system with clear section headers.

After each decision is confirmed:

  1. Create ADR Entry:
    • Use MADR format from ../templates/adr-template.md
    • Document context, decision, consequences, and alternatives
    • Link to constitution principles if applicable
    • Include Sub-System tag: Mark each ADR with its parent sub-system
Phase 3.5: Quality Requirements Exploration (Optional)

Objective: Identify which R&W perspectives apply to this system

Before completing ADRs, discuss quality requirements to help /architect-implement:

Core (Always Recommended):

  • Security - Authentication, authorization, data protection
  • Performance - Response time, throughput, scalability

Situational (Select Based on Requirements):

QualityQuestionIf Yes → Apply Perspective
AvailabilityDoes the system need high uptime (>99%)?Availability & Resilience
EvolutionWill the system need to change significantly over time?Evolution
RegulationIs the system subject to laws/regulations (GDPR, HIPAA)?Regulation
AccessibilityWill users with disabilities use this system?Accessibility
InternationalizationWill the system support multiple languages/regions?Internationalization
LocationAre there geographic distribution concerns?Location
UsabilityIs ease of use a critical success factor?Usability
ResourcesAre there significant constraints on people/budget/time?Development Resource

Present to user:

markdown
## Quality Requirements

Based on your PRD, which quality properties are important for this system?

### Core (Always Recommended)
- [x] Security
- [x] Performance

### Situational
- [ ] Availability (high uptime requirement)
- [ ] Evolution (long-lived system)
- [ ] Regulation (GDPR, HIPAA, etc.)
- [ ] Other: ___________

Please indicate which apply (e.g., "Availability, Regulation").

Store selected perspectives in ADR metadata for /architect-implement:

markdown
<!-- Quality Requirements -->
<!-- perspectives: security, performance, availability, regulation -->
  1. Sub-System Organization:

If decomposed, structure the ADR file as:

markdown
# Architecture Decision Records

## ADR Index

| ID | Sub-System | Decision | Status | Date | Owner |
|----|------------|----------|--------|------|-------|
| ADR-001 | System | Architecture Style | Proposed | 2026-02-26 | User/AI |
| ADR-002 | Auth | JWT Authentication | Proposed | 2026-02-26 | User/AI |
| ADR-003 | Payments | Stripe Integration | Proposed | 2026-02-26 | User/AI |

---

## System-Level ADRs

### ADR-001: [Decision Title]

[Full ADR content...]

---

## Auth Sub-System ADRs

### ADR-002: [Decision Title]

[Full ADR content...]

---

## Payments Sub-System ADRs

### ADR-003: [Decision Title]

[Full ADR content...]
  1. Cross-Cutting ADRs: Some decisions affect multiple sub-systems (e.g., "Use PostgreSQL for all sub-systems"). Mark these as System-Level and note impact on each sub-system.

  2. ADR Format (MADR 3.0.0 — see ../templates/adr-template.md):

markdown
---
status: proposed  # proposed | accepted | rejected | deprecated | superseded by ADR-0123 | discovered
date: YYYY-MM-DD
decision-makers: [list everyone involved in the decision]
consulted: [list everyone whose opinions were sought]
informed: [list everyone kept up-to-date on progress]
sub-system: System  # System | Auth | Payments | ...
superseded-by: ""
---

# {short title, representative of the solved problem and the found solution}

## Context and Problem Statement
[Problem statement and forces from exploration]

## Decision Drivers
* {decision driver 1}
* {decision driver 2}

## Considered Options
* {title option 1}
* {title option 2}

## Decision Outcome
Chosen option: "{title option 1}", because {justification}.

### Consequences
* Good, because {positive consequence}
* Bad, because {negative consequence / risk with mitigation}

### Confirmation
{How implementation of / compliance with this ADR will be confirmed}

## Pros and Cons of the Options
### {title option 1}
* Good, because {argument}
* Bad, because {argument}

## Constitution Alignment
| Principle | Alignment | Notes |
|-----------|-----------|-------|

## Related ADRs
* [ADR-XXX: {Related decision}](ADR-XXX.md)

## More Information
{Additional evidence, links, when/how to re-visit}
  1. Number ADRs sequentially: Start from ADR-001 for new projects, or continue from highest existing number
Phase 4: ADR Output

Objective: Write finalized ADRs to file

  1. Run Setup Script:

    • Execute {REPO_ROOT}/.agents/skills/architect-clarify/scripts/bash/setup-architect.sh (Requires the architect-clarify skill: adlc-cli skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-clarify). to ensure {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ directory exists
    • Script creates from template if directory is empty
    • Pass --no-decompose if decomposition was disabled
  2. Write ADRs:

    • Write each new ADR as {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ADR-{NNN}.md
    • The setup script auto-generates adr.md and adr.md index after writes
    • Update ADR index table at top of file (include Sub-System column)
    • Preserve any existing ADRs (don't overwrite)
    • If decomposed: Add section headers for each sub-system
  3. Report Summary:

    • List of sub-systems identified
    • ADRs created per sub-system with IDs and titles
    • Constitution alignment status
    • Cross-cutting decisions noted
    • Recommended next steps

Summary Format:

markdown
## Sub-System Decomposition Summary

### Sub-Systems Identified: 3

| # | Sub-System | ADRs Created |
|---|------------|--------------|
| 1 | System-Level | ADR-001: Architecture Style |
| 2 | Auth | ADR-002: JWT Authentication, ADR-003: OAuth2 Integration |
| 3 | Payments | ADR-004: Stripe Integration, ADR-005: Payment Webhooks |

### Cross-Cutting Decisions
- ADR-001 affects all sub-systems

### Next Steps
1. Review ADRs with /architect-clarify
2. Generate AD.md with /architect-implement
Key Rules
Exploration First
  • Do NOT generate architecture directly from PRD
  • Engage in discussion to validate assumptions
  • Surface trade-offs before committing to decisions
  • Allow iteration - user can revisit earlier decisions
Constitution Compliance
  • ADRs must align with constitution principles
  • Flag conflicts between PRD requirements and constitution
  • Constitution violations require explicit override with justification
Incremental ADRs
  • Create focused ADRs - one decision per ADR
  • Link related ADRs when decisions interact
  • Defer decisions that can be made later
  • Mark provisional decisions that may need revision
Quality Standards
  • Every ADR must have clear context explaining why decision was needed
  • Consequences must include both positive and negative outcomes
  • Alternatives must explain why they were rejected
  • Decisions must be actionable - clear enough to implement
Sub-System Decomposition
  • Auto-detect domains: Analyze PRD for distinct business domains automatically
  • Interactive confirmation: Always confirm sub-system breakdown with user
  • Balanced granularity: Aim for 3-7 sub-systems; avoid over-decomposition
  • Clear boundaries: Each sub-system should have distinct responsibilities
  • Cross-cutting concerns: Document system-level decisions separately
  • Per-sub-system exploration: Run architectural exploration per sub-system for focused decisions
  • Use --no-decompose: Skip decomposition for simple/small systems
Workflow Guidance & Transitions
After /architect-init

Recommended next steps:

  1. Review ADRs: Ensure all decisions are accurate and complete
  2. Run /architect-clarify: Refine any ambiguous or incomplete ADRs
  3. Run /architect-implement: Generate full Architecture Description from ADRs
  4. Proceed to features: Use /architect-specify to create new ADRs for additional decisions
Context

$ARGUMENTS

Next Steps

After specify completes, run /architect-clarify to refine and validate the ADRs.

Verification

  • The setup script {REPO_ROOT}/.agents/skills/architect-clarify/scripts/bash/setup-architect.sh (Requires the architect-clarify skill: adlc-cli skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-clarify). has been executed and {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ exists.
  • One focused ADR file per decision exists at {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/ADR-{NNN}.md.
  • Each ADR follows MADR format, includes its parent sub-system tag, and has status Proposed.
  • adr.md is auto-generated in {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/.
  • The adr.md index is auto-generated in {REPO_ROOT}/.adlc/drafts/adr/.
  • Sub-system decomposition summary is produced (or monolithic rationale recorded if decomposition was disabled).
  • Constitution alignment status is checked and any conflicts are flagged.
  • Cross-cutting decisions are documented as system-level ADRs with impact noted per sub-system.
  • Selected quality requirement perspectives are stored in ADR metadata.

© tikalk, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in skills/architect/architect-specify of tikalk/adlc-team-skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 2dbed36

Compare with similar skills

Architect Specify next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Architect Specify compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Architect Specify this skilltikalk/adlc-team-skills141—~6.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
PR Design DocOpenHands/OpenHands90k—~2.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Cto AdvisorIbrahim-3d/orchestrator-supaconductor3804 repos~2.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Improve Codebase Architectureywwynm/EverythingDone14415 repos~1.3kAutomated safety check: PassGPL-3.0
Domain Modelingbrim-borium/spotify_sdk1665 repos~806Automated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Design Doc MermaidSpillwaveSolutions/design-doc-mermaid1751 repos~5.6kAutomated safety check: PassNone

Similar skills

  • PR Design Doc

    OpenHands/OpenHands

    For a non-trivial pull request, write a self-contained HTML design doc under the temporary .pr/ directory and link a visibility-appropriate preview in the PR description, so maintainers grasp the…

    90k GitHub stars~2.4k tokensUpdated today
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Cto Advisor

    Ibrahim-3d/orchestrator-supaconductor

    Technical leadership guidance for engineering teams, architecture decisions, and technology strategy.

    380 GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~2.4k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Improve Codebase Architecture

    ywwynm/EverythingDone

    Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/.

    144 GitHub starsUsed in 15 repos~1.3k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Domain Modeling

    brim-borium/spotify_sdk

    Build and sharpen a project's domain model. An agent skill from brim-borium/spotify_sdk.

    166 GitHub starsUsed in 5 repos~806 tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Design Doc Mermaid

    SpillwaveSolutions/design-doc-mermaid

    Create Mermaid diagrams (flowchart, sequence, class, ER, state, C4, architecture) from text or source code.

    175 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~5.6k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Learning Opportunities

    DrCatHicks/learning-opportunities

    Facilitates deliberate skill development during AI-assisted coding.

    2.5k GitHub stars~2.5k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed

More from tikalk/adlc-team-skills

All 44 skills in this repo
  • Team Boot

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when a session starts or resumes after compaction (auto via the sessionstart and sessioncompact event hooks) and the team AI directives context — constitution, CDR index…

    141 GitHub stars~2.2k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Architect Clarify

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when ADRs need review, gaps need filling, or ADR status must be approved as Accepted before architecture generation.

    141 GitHub stars~4.7k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Change Clarify

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when reviewing, accepting, rejecting, or deferring ChDRs mined by change-init, validating inferred decisions against their git and issue evidence before promotion to project…

    141 GitHub stars~2.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Change Init

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when you want guided mining of git history, structured change-story clustering, or comprehensive rationale recovery before documenting.

    141 GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Change Publish

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when accepted ChDRs are ready for promotion from drafts to project memory at docs/adlc/memory/chdr/ and the boot-facing chdr.md index needs regenerating.

    141 GitHub stars~2k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Evals Analyze

    tikalk/adlc-team-skills

    A skill your agent uses when evaluation results need triage and loop-closing — spec failures route to deterministic checks or context rules, generalization failures to the evaluator backlog.

    141 GitHub stars~1.2k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Architect Specify

What does Architect Specify do?

A skill your agent uses when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting. Architect Specify is an agent skill from tikalk/adlc-team-skills. Use when you want guided trade-off analysis, multi-option comparison, or structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting.

When should I use Architect Specify?

Architect Specify fits situations like: you want guided trade-off analysis; multi-option comparison; structured architectural decision facilitation before documenting.

How do I install Architect Specify in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-specify -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/architect/architect-specify in tikalk/adlc-team-skills) into .claude/skills/architect-specify in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Architect Specify in Codex?

Run `npx skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-specify -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/architect/architect-specify in tikalk/adlc-team-skills) into .agents/skills/architect-specify in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Architect Specify in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add tikalk/adlc-team-skills --skill architect-specify -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/architect-specify, .gemini/skills/architect-specify, .github/skills/architect-specify and .opencode/skills/architect-specify in your project.

What does Architect Specify need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Architect Specify is instructions for the agent only.

Does Architect Specify access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Architect Specify safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Architect Specify use?

Architect Specify is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Architect Specify use?

About 6.4k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 26k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Architect Specify?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Architect Specify: PR Design Doc (OpenHands/OpenHands, 90k stars), Cto Advisor (Ibrahim-3d/orchestrator-supaconductor, 380 stars), Improve Codebase Architecture (ywwynm/EverythingDone, 144 stars) and Domain Modeling (brim-borium/spotify_sdk, 166 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Architect Specify?

tikalk (a GitHub organization) maintains it in tikalk/adlc-team-skills, which has 141 GitHub stars. The repository holds 44 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 6, 2026.

Source: tikalk/adlc-team-skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.