Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill --skill create-architectural-decision-recordgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boshi-xixixi/TraeSkillWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/create-architectural-decision-record)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/create-architectural-decision-record"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/create-architectural-decision-record.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00024 | $0.00701 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
create-architectural-decision-record scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- create-architectural-decision-record — 95% identical, 3 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Create Architectural Decision Record
Create an ADR document for ${input:DecisionTitle} using structured formatting optimized for AI consumption and human readability.
Inputs
- Context:
${input:Context} - Decision:
${input:Decision} - Alternatives:
${input:Alternatives} - Stakeholders:
${input:Stakeholders}
Input Validation
If any of the required inputs are not provided or cannot be determined from the conversation history, ask the user to provide the missing information before proceeding with ADR generation.
Requirements
- Use precise, unambiguous language
- Follow standardized ADR format with front matter
- Include both positive and negative consequences
- Document alternatives with rejection rationale
- Structure for machine parsing and human reference
- Use coded bullet points (3-4 letter codes + 3-digit numbers) for multi-item sections
The ADR must be saved in the /docs/adr/ directory using the naming convention: adr-NNNN-[title-slug].md, where NNNN is the next sequential 4-digit number (e.g., adr-0001-database-selection.md).
Required Documentation Structure
The documentation file must follow the template below, ensuring that all sections are filled out appropriately. The front matter for the markdown should be structured correctly as per the example following:
---
title: "ADR-NNNN: [Decision Title]"
status: "Proposed"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
authors: "[Stakeholder Names/Roles]"
tags: ["architecture", "decision"]
supersedes: ""
superseded_by: ""
---
# ADR-NNNN: [Decision Title]
## Status
**Proposed** | Accepted | Rejected | Superseded | Deprecated
## Context
[Problem statement, technical constraints, business requirements, and environmental factors requiring this decision.]
## Decision
[Chosen solution with clear rationale for selection.]
## Consequences
### Positive
- **POS-001**: [Beneficial outcomes and advantages]
- **POS-002**: [Performance, maintainability, scalability improvements]
- **POS-003**: [Alignment with architectural principles]
### Negative
- **NEG-001**: [Trade-offs, limitations, drawbacks]
- **NEG-002**: [Technical debt or complexity introduced]
- **NEG-003**: [Risks and future challenges]
## Alternatives Considered
### [Alternative 1 Name]
- **ALT-001**: **Description**: [Brief technical description]
- **ALT-002**: **Rejection Reason**: [Why this option was not selected]
### [Alternative 2 Name]
- **ALT-003**: **Description**: [Brief technical description]
- **ALT-004**: **Rejection Reason**: [Why this option was not selected]
## Implementation Notes
- **IMP-001**: [Key implementation considerations]
- **IMP-002**: [Migration or rollout strategy if applicable]
- **IMP-003**: [Monitoring and success criteria]
## References
- **REF-001**: [Related ADRs]
- **REF-002**: [External documentation]
- **REF-003**: [Standards or frameworks referenced]
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 4d ago First seen · 98 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A c11af0c34fa0
create-architectural-decision-record is a skill published in the GitHub repository boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill (261 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 701 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
<skill-name>
A template for defining a coding-agent skill, including its title, trigger situations, overview, workflow, common mistakes, and optional references.
spec-writing
A method for writing a software specification: a document that records decisions, reasons, boundaries, and ways to judge whether implementation succeeded. It first checks whether important unknowns require user clarification or technical research.
onboarding-unknown-codebase
A method for quickly understanding an unfamiliar codebase, meaning a software project whose structure and behavior you do not yet know. It builds a project map by examining overview files, directories, and one main execution path.
commit-message
A guide for writing clear, traceable Git commit messages using the Conventional Commits format, which labels changes such as features, bug fixes, documentation, and refactoring.
clarifying-questions
Guidance for clarifying vague or assumption-heavy requests before making changes.
testing
A guide for writing tests that check observable behaviour rather than the code's internal structure. Tests are repeatable checks that confirm software still gives the expected result after changes.