Architecture DecisionSAFE

Turn Claude Code into a full game dev studio — 49 AI agents, 72 workflow skills, and a complete coordination system mirroring real studio hierarchy.

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: architecture-decision
description: "Create an ADR documenting a technical decision: context, alternatives considered, consequences."
argument-hint: "[title | retrofit <path> | accept <ADR-id>] [--review full|lean|solo]"
user-invocable: true
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Agent, AskUserQuestion, Bash(wc -c *), Bash(bash "*/.claude/skills/architecture-decision/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config *)
model: sonnet
---

!`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density,team.size`

Resolved above — use as-is; `--review` overrides `review_mode`. No block →
defaults in `.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`.


When this skill is invoked:

## 0. Parse Arguments — Detect Retrofit / Acceptance Mode


See `.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in `.claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md` — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.


Every `AskUserQuestion` call follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
`automation_always_ask` categories always prompt).

**`team.size`**: which agents validate this ADR (orthogonal to review_mode/workflow).
- **`individual`** (default): `technical-director` (TD-ADR) + the engine-specialist.
- **`small`** and **`studio`**: the same two. This skill spawns no engine
  sub-specialist and no adversarial reviewer at any size.

**`docs.density`** — it controls the *depth* of the ADR's prose sections, not
which sections the skeleton emits (that is fixed). `modes.rigor` sets it
alongside `workflow`; set `docs.density` explicitly to vary ADR verbosity alone:
`terse` (the default, via `rigor: minimal`) = decision + alternatives as bullets, one line of rationale each;
`balanced` = paragraph per section with light rationale (`rigor: standard`); `thorough` =
full prose with trade-offs and worked rationale in Decision, Alternatives, and
Consequences. Apply it to the prose sections; the Engine Compatibility, ADR
Dependencies, and GDD Requirements tables are structural and stay whole at every
density.

**`workflow`** (see `.claude/docs/workflow-modes.md`):
- `full` — all ADRs on the required ADR list must be completed.
- `standard` — critical ADRs only (Foundation-layer systems).
- `minimal` — not required. Can still be run voluntarily.

**If the argument starts with `retrofit` followed by a file path**
(e.g., `/architecture-decision retrofit docs/architecture/adr-0001-event-system.md`):

Enter **retrofit mode**:

1. Read the existing ADR file completely.
2. Identify which template sections are present by scanning headings:
   - `## Status` — **BLOCKING if missing**: `/story-readiness` cannot check ADR acceptance
   - `## ADR Dependencies` — HIGH if missing: dependency ordering breaks
   - `## Engine Compatibility` — HIGH if missing: post-cutoff risk unknown
   - `## GDD Requirements Addressed` — MEDIUM if missing: traceability lost
   - `## Date` — MEDIUM if missing, and no `## Last Verified` either: `/create-stories`
     stamps stories with it and `/dev-story` compares against it, so without it a
     story can never tell whether the ADR changed
3. Present to the user:
   ```
   ## Retrofit: [ADR title]
   File: [path]

   Sections already present (will not be touched):
   ✓ Status: [current value, or "MISSING — will add"]
   ✓ [section]

   Missing sections to add:
   ✗ Status — BLOCKING (stories cannot validate ADR acceptance without this)
   ✗ ADR Dependencies — HIGH
   ✗ Engine Compatibility — HIGH
   ```
4. Ask: "Shall I add the [N] missing sections? I will not modify any existing content."
   If no: write nothing, and report the missing sections by name.
5. If yes:
   - For **Status**: ask the user — "What is the current status of this decision?"
     Options: "Proposed", "Accepted", "Deprecated", "Superseded by ADR-XXXX"
     An `Accepted` answer — a decision already in force — is not written as
     given: write `Proposed`, add the other missing sections, then run
     acceptance mode (below) on this ADR. Its dependency check, confirmation and
     story unblocking apply here too; it stays the only path that sets `Accepted`.
   - For **ADR Dependencies**: ask — "Does this decision depend on any other ADR?
     Does it enable or block any other ADR or epic?" Accept "None" for each field.
   - For **Engine Compatibility**: read the engine reference docs (same as Step 1 below)
     and ask the user to confirm the domain. Then generate the table with verified data.
   - For **GDD Requirements Addressed**: ask — "Which GDD systems motivated this decision?
     What specific requirement in each GDD does this ADR address?"
   - Append each missing section to the ADR file using the Edit tool.
   - For **Date** (counted only when there is no `## Last Verified`): append
     `## Date` with today's date — even when it is the only missing section, the
     case `/dev-story` sends you here for — and say that it records the retrofit,
     not when the decision was made.
   - **Never modify any existing section.** Only append or fill absent sections.
6. Suggest: "Run `/architecture-review` to re-validate coverage now that this ADR
   has its Status and Dependencies fields."

**If the argument starts with `accept` followed by an ADR id**
(e.g., `/architecture-decision accept ADR-0005`):

Enter **acceptance mode**. This is the *only* path in the framework that moves an
ADR from `Proposed` to `Accepted`. Authoring always produces `Proposed`
(Step 5), while
`/create-control-manifest`, `/create-epics`, `/create-stories` and `/gate-check`
all require `Accepted` — so without this mode the pipeline had a state it could
enter and never leave.

1. **Resolve the id to a file, then read it.** Glob
   `docs/architecture/adr-NNNN-*.md` for the given number. If **no** file matches,
   or **more than one** does, stop and say which — 

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

What the source does

Filesystem

none-observed

Network

none-observed

Shell

none-observed

Dependencies

pinned

Secrets in source

none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.