decision-log
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when choosing between named alternatives (libraries, tools, algorithms, schemas, approaches), when making an architectural decision that has lasting consequences, when the user asks "should we use X or Y", "which approach is better", or "why did we choose X", or when you pick one option over another for non-obvious reasons. Trigger whenever a choice is made that future work would need to understand. For progress logging of completed work (what was built, TODOs), use a project journal instead. This skill = decision rationale storage for lasting architectural choices.
46 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- CharleneTStrain/product-ops-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- MichinaoShimizu/kirokutheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Nomanriaz786/claude-consulting-teamtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- aya-taleb/productivity-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- warstellar/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 24, 2026
- Evan-Daruwalla/claude-skill-suitetheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use product-brief, retrospective and 9 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
erik-kroonSkillproduct-brief
Turn conversation context, codebase findings, and product intent into a PRD-style brief without assuming a specific issue tracker. Use when the user wants a PRD, product brief, feature spec, or implementation-ready product artifact.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillretrospective
Review how work went and improve the next round. USE WHEN asked for a retro, delays, or process lessons. DO NOT USE for code review or transcript replay.
Also in 4 projects that use this
OpenAISkillmeeting-prep
Use when creating Public Equity Investing meeting prep briefs. Do not use for private diligence, IB, FP&A, legal, or scheduling-only tasks.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Microsoft AzureSkilltest
Also in 3 projects that use this
HashiCorpSkillchangelog
Add a `.changelog/<PR_NUMBER>.txt` entry for a GitHub Pull Request, commit, and push.
Also in 3 projects that use this
genomewalkerSkilllearn
Learn from web sources, generate SKILL.md, and store key patterns in soul memory. Trigger keywords: learn, skill-gen, web-learn, documentation, tutorial.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions46 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 46
- davekilleen/Dex★ 509same name
- zrosenfield/sharepoint-ai-skills★ 96same name
- GTMify/aigtm★ 25same name
- Sapere-IA/sdd-onboarding-kit★ 19same name
- ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit★ 19same name
- Fadi88/one-man-startup★ 16same name
- Unabyss/unabyss-skills★ 15same name
- WupfAGI/claude-investment-skills★ 14same name
- lglucas/ai-dev-operating-system★ 12same name
- carlkibler/agent-skills★ 6same name
36 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- code-review-sessionSkill
- debug-sessionSkill
- devil-advocateSkill
- judge-panelSkill
- performance-tuningSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- refactor-sessionSkill
- security-auditSkill
- spec-driven-devSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 39 edited versions we read keep these.
5
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 54
If a related decision already exists, update it rather than creating a duplicate.
- Very specific: line 59
If DECISIONS.md does not exist, create it with this header first:
- Distinctive: line 102
If the decision is significant, mention it in the project's build log / journal so progress tracking points back at the rationale:
- Distinctive: line 138
NOT for logging daily progress or completed work — use a project journal / build log instead.
- Distinctive: line 139
NOT for capturing reusable debugging insights — capture those as a separate engineering/lessons note instead.
- Distinctive: line 140
NOT for planning or designing features from scratch — use spec-driven-dev.
- Distinctive: line 141
NEVER use this for trivially reversible preferences that don't affect architecture.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 39 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Hard Rules
- Only log decisions future work would need to understand. Trivially reversible preferences (formatting, naming taste, one-off config values) do not get logged. A constrained, lasting, architectural choice does.
- Never log a decision without its alternatives. The Alternatives Considered section is the most valuable part of the record. A decision with no alternatives is just a statement and provides no future value.
- Rationale must name a specific tradeoff. "It was better" is not rationale. Name the concrete reason this option won (e.g. lower operational overhead, no added dependency, matches existing skills).
- A reversed decision must be marked
Superseded, not deleted. Add a new entry explaining the reversal and link the two. The history of why a choice changed is itself load-bearing. - The log only has value if it is read. Consult it at the start of work and whenever a settled topic is re-opened — otherwise the same decisions get re-litigated from scratch.
Decision Log
Prevents re-litigating past decisions every few work sessions. Writes architectural and design
decisions to a single DECISIONS.md file with rationale, the alternatives considered, and the
conditions that would trigger revisiting the choice. Without this, the same decisions get re-made
from scratch repeatedly, often inconsistently.
Canonical persistence: one markdown file, DECISIONS.md, at the project root, append-only, newest
entries at the bottom. No database, no external store — a plain file any future session or teammate
can read.
Steps
1. Identify the Decision
- State what is being decided in one sentence: "Choosing X over Y for [purpose]."
- Is this a lasting decision that would affect future code or architecture? If no — skip this skill.
- Is it a constrained choice or just a preference? Preferences don't need logging; constrained choices do.
2. Check DECISIONS.md for an Existing Entry
[ -f DECISIONS.md ] && grep -i "[keyword from decision]" DECISIONS.md || echo "No existing entry"If a related decision already exists, update it rather than creating a duplicate. Change the old
entry's Status to Superseded and link it to the new entry.
3. Write the Decision Entry
If DECISIONS.md does not exist, create it with this header first:
# Project Decisions
Architectural and design decisions made in this project, with rationale and alternatives.
Consult this before re-opening settled questions.
---Then append the new entry:
## [Short Decision Title]
Date: [DATE]
Status: Active
### Decision
[One sentence: what was decided]
### Context
[1-2 sentences: why this decision was needed, what problem it solves]
### Alternatives Considered
- **[Option A]**: [why rejected or not chosen]
- **[Option B]**: [why rejected or not chosen]
- **[Chosen option]**: [why this was selected]
### Rationale
[2-3 sentences: the reasoning that led to this choice]
### Consequences
- What becomes easier: [...]
- What becomes harder: [...]
- What this locks us into: [...]
### Revisit If
[What circumstances would cause a re-evaluation of this decision]4. Reference in the Project Journal (optional)
If the decision is significant, mention it in the project's build log / journal so progress tracking points back at the rationale:
Decision logged: [title]5. Confirm
Tell the user:
"Logged to DECISIONS.md: [title]. Read DECISIONS.md to review all logged decisions."
Skill Chain
| Stage | Skill |
| Before (evaluating options) | spec-driven-dev — planning may surface decisions to log |
| Stress-testing the choice first | devil-advocate — argue against the preferred option before committing |
| Wide solution space, no obvious winner | judge-panel — run competing attempts, then log the winner here |
| This skill | decision-log — write the decision to DECISIONS.md |
| After (session end) | commit DECISIONS.md alongside the rest of the session's changes |
Trigger Conditions
- Choosing between named alternatives — libraries, tools, algorithms, schemas, data models, or approaches.
- Making an architectural or design decision with lasting consequences.
- The user asks "should we use X or Y", "which approach is better", or "why did we choose X".
- You pick one option over another for a non-obvious reason that a future session would otherwise re-question.
Out of Scope
- NOT for logging daily progress or completed work — use a project journal / build log instead.
- NOT for capturing reusable debugging insights — capture those as a separate engineering/lessons note instead.
- NOT for planning or designing features from scratch — use spec-driven-dev.
- NEVER use this for trivially reversible preferences that don't affect architecture.
Common Traps
- Logging every tiny choice — only log decisions future work would need to understand. Skip obvious or trivially reversible ones; the log loses signal if it fills with noise.
- Logging without alternatives — the Alternatives Considered section is the most valuable part. A decision without alternatives is just a statement. Never skip it.
- Never reading DECISIONS.md — the file has no value if it isn't consulted. Reference it at the start of work and whenever a topic from it is re-opened.
- Stale "Active" status — decisions that have been reversed must be updated to
Status: Supersededwith a new entry explaining the reversal. - Vague rationale — "it was better" is not rationale. Name the specific tradeoff that made this option win (e.g. lower operational overhead, no additional dependency, matches existing team skills).
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

