What problem does it solve? Decision and requirement documents often suffer from vague language, untestable requirements, missing alternatives, and inconsistent terminology, making them useless as records of why decisions were made or what systems must do. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Mode-specific guidance: Separate machinery for ADRs (MADR skeleton with context, options, decision, consequences), requirements (testable statements with validation conditions, RFC 2119 keyword discipline), and architecture docs (C4 vocabulary). - Argument rigor checks: Built-in checks that the document answers what happens if we do nothing, who bears the cost, and what the strongest objection is. - EARS reference: Deferred Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax templates in references/ears.md for safety-relevant or contractual requirements. - Use Case: An engineer needs to record why the team chose one database over another. The skill produces a numbered ADR with honest costs for each option, stated consequences including the losses, and a fairness-checked summary of rejected alternatives. ## Quick Start Write an ADR documenting the decision to migrate the API gateway to a new framework, including at least two options and their consequences.