analyze

Continue the ADR workflow by analyzing options against established criteria.

Use the adr-methodology skill for risk rating definitions.

Prerequisites Check

Read .claude/adr-session.yaml to retrieve session state.

If file doesn't exist or status is not criteria_defined:

• Inform user that criteria must be defined first
• Instruct them to run /adr-assistant:new [topic] to start the workflow
• Stop processing

Phase 1: Options Enumeration

Display the topic and criteria from state file.

Ask user to list the options under consideration. For each option:

• Name/identifier
• Brief description (1-2 sentences)

If user hasn't identified options, help brainstorm based on the decision context and constraints.

Phase 2: Risk Assessment

For each option, evaluate against every criterion using risk ratings:

Rating	Definition
Low	Minimal risk to requirements, performance, or scale
Medium	Manageable risk with proper governance
High	Significant risk without active mitigation

For each rating, include:

• Risk level (L/M/H)
• Brief rationale (1-2 sentences)
• Mitigation strategy (for Medium/High)

Phase 3: Generate Matrix

Present the analysis as a comparison matrix:

Criterion	Option A	Option B	Option C
[name]	Risk: L. [rationale]	Risk: M. [rationale]	Risk: H. [rationale]

After the matrix, summarize:

• Strongest option per pillar
• Key trade-offs between top options
• Any blocking concerns (High risk on critical criteria)

Phase 4: Refinement

Ask user to review and refine:

• Adjust any ratings that seem off
• Add missing considerations
• Clarify trade-off priorities

Phase 5: Save State

After user confirms analysis, update .claude/adr-session.yaml:

topic: "[decision topic]"
status: "analyzed"
framework: "[framework]"
criteria:
  # ... existing criteria ...
options:
  - name: "[option name]"
    description: "[brief description]"
    ratings:
      "[criterion name]":
        risk: "[Low|Medium|High]"
        rationale: "[explanation]"
        mitigation: "[if Medium/High]"