@intentsolutions/blueprint 2.0.0 → 2.1.0

package/templates/core/02_adr.md

@@ -0,0 +1,432 @@
+# 🏗️ Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
+
+**Metadata**
+- Last Updated: {{DATE}}
+- Maintainer: AI-Dev Toolkit
+- Related Docs: 06_architecture.md
+
+> **🎯 Purpose**
+> This ADR documents a significant architectural decision, providing context, rationale, alternatives considered, and consequences. It serves as a historical record for future architectural discussions and evolution.
+
+---
+
+## 📋 ADR Metadata
+
+| Field | Value |
+|-------|-------|
+| **ADR Number** | ADR-{number} |
+| **Title** | _{Decision title in imperative form}_ |
+| **Status** | _{Proposed / Accepted / Deprecated / Superseded}_ |
+| **Date** | _{YYYY-MM-DD}_ |
+| **Authors** | _{Names and roles}_ |
+| **Reviewers** | _{Architecture review board}_ |
+| **Stakeholders** | _{Affected teams and systems}_ |
+
+### Status Definitions
+- **🟡 Proposed:** Under discussion and review
+- **🟢 Accepted:** Approved and ready for implementation
+- **🔴 Deprecated:** No longer recommended for new implementations
+- **🔄 Superseded:** Replaced by a newer ADR (link to replacement)
+
+---
+
+## 🎯 1. Decision Summary
+
+### 1.1 Executive Summary
+**Decision:** _{One sentence describing what was decided}_
+
+**Impact:** _{High-level summary of what this changes}_
+
+**Timeline:** _{When this decision takes effect}_
+
+### 1.2 Decision Statement
+> **We will** _{action/approach}_ **in order to** _{achieve outcome}_ **accepting that** _{trade-offs}_
+
+**Example:**
+> We will migrate from monolithic architecture to microservices using Docker and Kubernetes in order to improve scalability and team independence accepting that we will incur additional operational complexity and initial development overhead.
+
+---
+
+## 🔍 2. Context & Problem Statement
+
+### 2.1 Business Context
+- **Strategic Goals:** _{How this aligns with business objectives}_
+- **Market Drivers:** _{External factors influencing this decision}_
+- **Timeline Pressures:** _{Deadlines or milestones affecting choice}_
+- **Resource Constraints:** _{Budget, team, technology limitations}_
+
+### 2.2 Technical Context
+- **Current Architecture:** _{Description of existing system}_
+- **Pain Points:** _{Specific problems we're solving}_
+- **Scale Requirements:** _{Performance, volume, growth expectations}_
+- **Integration Needs:** _{External systems, data flows}_
+
+### 2.3 Problem Statement
+**Core Problem:** _{Clear statement of what needs to be solved}_
+
+**Success Criteria:** _{How we'll know this decision succeeded}_
+- Metric 1: _{Quantifiable measure}_
+- Metric 2: _{Quantifiable measure}_
+- Metric 3: _{Quantifiable measure}_
+
+### 2.4 Constraints & Requirements
+**Hard Constraints:**
+- [ ] _{Non-negotiable requirement}_
+- [ ] _{Compliance or regulatory requirement}_
+- [ ] _{Technical limitation}_
+
+**Soft Constraints:**
+- [ ] _{Preferred approach or tool}_
+- [ ] _{Team expertise consideration}_
+- [ ] _{Budget preference}_
+
+---
+
+## 💭 3. Decision Drivers
+
+### 3.1 Technical Drivers
+| Driver | Weight | Description |
+|--------|--------|-------------|
+| **Performance** | High | _{Specific performance requirements}_ |
+| **Scalability** | High | _{Growth and load expectations}_ |
+| **Maintainability** | Medium | _{Long-term code/system health}_ |
+| **Security** | High | _{Security and compliance needs}_ |
+| **Reliability** | Medium | _{Uptime and stability requirements}_ |
+
+### 3.2 Business Drivers
+| Driver | Weight | Description |
+|--------|--------|-------------|
+| **Time to Market** | High | _{Speed of delivery importance}_ |
+| **Cost** | Medium | _{Budget and resource constraints}_ |
+| **Risk** | High | _{Risk tolerance and mitigation}_ |
+| **Team Skills** | Medium | _{Available expertise and learning curve}_ |
+
+### 3.3 Quality Attributes
+Using Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM):
+
+| Quality Attribute | Current State | Target State | Priority |
+|-------------------|---------------|--------------|----------|
+| **Performance** | _{Current metrics}_ | _{Target metrics}_ | High |
+| **Availability** | _{Current uptime}_ | _{Target uptime}_ | High |
+| **Security** | _{Current posture}_ | _{Target posture}_ | High |
+| **Modifiability** | _{Current complexity}_ | _{Target flexibility}_ | Medium |
+| **Usability** | _{Current UX}_ | _{Target UX}_ | Medium |
+
+---
+
+## 🛠️ 4. Considered Alternatives
+
+### 4.1 Option 1: _{Chosen Solution}_
+**Description:** _{Detailed description of the selected approach}_
+
+**Pros:**
+- ✅ _{Advantage 1 with specific benefit}_
+- ✅ _{Advantage 2 with quantified impact}_
+- ✅ _{Advantage 3 with business value}_
+
+**Cons:**
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 1 with mitigation plan}_
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 2 with acceptance rationale}_
+
+**Cost Analysis:**
+- Development: _{Time and resource estimates}_
+- Infrastructure: _{Ongoing operational costs}_
+- Maintenance: _{Long-term support costs}_
+
+**Risk Assessment:**
+- Technical Risk: _{Low/Medium/High with mitigation}_
+- Implementation Risk: _{Low/Medium/High with mitigation}_
+- Operational Risk: _{Low/Medium/High with mitigation}_
+
+### 4.2 Option 2: _{Alternative Solution}_
+**Description:** _{Detailed description of alternative approach}_
+
+**Pros:**
+- ✅ _{Advantage 1}_
+- ✅ _{Advantage 2}_
+
+**Cons:**
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 1}_
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 2}_
+- ❌ _{Critical flaw that ruled this out}_
+
+**Why Rejected:** _{Specific reasons this wasn't chosen}_
+
+### 4.3 Option 3: _{Alternative Solution}_
+**Description:** _{Detailed description of alternative approach}_
+
+**Pros:**
+- ✅ _{Advantage 1}_
+- ✅ _{Advantage 2}_
+
+**Cons:**
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 1}_
+- ❌ _{Disadvantage 2}_
+
+**Why Rejected:** _{Specific reasons this wasn't chosen}_
+
+### 4.4 Do Nothing (Status Quo)
+**Description:** _{Continue with current approach}_
+
+**Pros:**
+- ✅ No implementation cost
+- ✅ No disruption to current operations
+- ✅ Team familiar with existing system
+
+**Cons:**
+- ❌ _{Problems persist and may worsen}_
+- ❌ _{Technical debt accumulation}_
+- ❌ _{Competitive disadvantage}_
+
+**Why Rejected:** _{Specific reasons status quo isn't viable}_
+
+---
+
+## 📊 5. Decision Matrix
+
+### 5.1 Evaluation Criteria
+| Criteria | Weight | Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 | Status Quo |
+|----------|--------|----------|----------|----------|------------|
+| **Performance** | 25% | 9 | 7 | 6 | 4 |
+| **Development Speed** | 20% | 6 | 8 | 7 | 9 |
+| **Maintainability** | 20% | 8 | 6 | 7 | 3 |
+| **Cost Effectiveness** | 15% | 7 | 9 | 8 | 10 |
+| **Risk Level** | 10% | 6 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
+| **Team Readiness** | 10% | 7 | 8 | 6 | 9 |
+| ****Weighted Score** | **100%** | **7.4** | **7.2** | **6.7** | **6.1** |
+
+*Scoring: 1-10 scale where 10 is best*
+
+### 5.2 Decision Rationale
+Based on the weighted analysis, **Option 1** scores highest (7.4) primarily due to:
+- Superior performance characteristics (critical for our scale)
+- Strong maintainability (important for long-term evolution)
+- Acceptable development complexity (manageable with current team)
+
+While Option 2 scores well on development speed and cost, the performance limitations make it unsuitable for our projected scale requirements.
+
+---
+
+## ⚡ 6. Consequences & Impact
+
+### 6.1 Positive Consequences
+**Immediate Benefits:**
+- _{Benefit 1 with timeline}_
+- _{Benefit 2 with measurable impact}_
+- _{Benefit 3 with business value}_
+
+**Long-term Benefits:**
+- _{Strategic advantage 1}_
+- _{Capability improvement 2}_
+- _{Competitive edge 3}_
+
+### 6.2 Negative Consequences
+**Immediate Challenges:**
+- _{Challenge 1 with mitigation plan}_
+- _{Challenge 2 with timeline for resolution}_
+- _{Challenge 3 with workaround strategy}_
+
+**Long-term Concerns:**
+- _{Risk 1 with monitoring strategy}_
+- _{Limitation 2 with future decision point}_
+- _{Technical debt 3 with paydown plan}_
+
+### 6.3 Impact Assessment
+
+#### Team Impact
+| Team | Impact Level | Specific Changes | Support Needed |
+|------|--------------|------------------|----------------|
+| **Frontend** | Medium | _{API integration changes}_ | _{Training on new patterns}_ |
+| **Backend** | High | _{Core architecture changes}_ | _{Architecture guidance}_ |
+| **DevOps** | High | _{Infrastructure changes}_ | _{New tools and processes}_ |
+| **QA** | Medium | _{Testing strategy updates}_ | _{Test environment updates}_ |
+
+#### System Impact
+| System | Impact Level | Required Changes | Timeline |
+|--------|--------------|------------------|----------|
+| **Authentication** | Low | _{Configuration updates}_ | _{1 week}_ |
+| **Database** | High | _{Schema migration}_ | _{4 weeks}_ |
+| **API Gateway** | Medium | _{Routing updates}_ | _{2 weeks}_ |
+| **Monitoring** | Medium | _{New metrics and alerts}_ | _{3 weeks}_ |
+
+#### Performance Impact
+| Metric | Current | Expected | Timeline |
+|--------|---------|----------|----------|
+| **Response Time** | _{X ms}_ | _{Y ms}_ | _{Z weeks}_ |
+| **Throughput** | _{X req/s}_ | _{Y req/s}_ | _{Z weeks}_ |
+| **Availability** | _{X%}_ | _{Y%}_ | _{Z weeks}_ |
+
+---
+
+## 🚀 7. Implementation Plan
+
+### 7.1 Implementation Phases
+**Phase 1: Foundation (Weeks 1-4)**
+- [ ] _{Infrastructure setup}_
+- [ ] _{Core component development}_
+- [ ] _{Initial testing framework}_
+- **Exit Criteria:** _{Basic functionality demonstrated}_
+
+**Phase 2: Migration (Weeks 5-8)**
+- [ ] _{Data migration planning}_
+- [ ] _{Parallel system operation}_
+- [ ] _{Gradual traffic shift}_
+- **Exit Criteria:** _{50% traffic successfully migrated}_
+
+**Phase 3: Optimization (Weeks 9-12)**
+- [ ] _{Performance tuning}_
+- [ ] _{Monitoring refinement}_
+- [ ] _{Documentation completion}_
+- **Exit Criteria:** _{Full migration with performance targets met}_
+
+### 7.2 Success Metrics
+| Metric | Target | Measurement Method | Review Date |
+|--------|--------|--------------------|-------------|
+| **Migration Completion** | 100% | _{Traffic analytics}_ | _{Date}_ |
+| **Performance Improvement** | _{X% faster}_ | _{Response time monitoring}_ | _{Date}_ |
+| **Error Rate** | _{< X%}_ | _{Error tracking system}_ | _{Date}_ |
+| **Team Velocity** | _{Maintained}_ | _{Sprint metrics}_ | _{Date}_ |
+
+### 7.3 Risk Mitigation
+| Risk | Mitigation Strategy | Owner | Status |
+|------|-------------------|-------|--------|
+| **Performance Regression** | _{Load testing, canary deployment}_ | _{Tech Lead}_ | _{Planned}_ |
+| **Data Loss** | _{Backup strategy, rollback plan}_ | _{DevOps}_ | _{Planned}_ |
+| **Team Productivity** | _{Training, pair programming}_ | _{Manager}_ | _{In Progress}_ |
+
+---
+
+## 🔄 8. Review & Evolution
+
+### 8.1 Review Schedule
+- **30-Day Review:** _{Initial implementation assessment}_
+- **90-Day Review:** _{Performance and stability evaluation}_
+- **1-Year Review:** _{Strategic value assessment}_
+
+### 8.2 Decision Review Criteria
+**Trigger Events for Review:**
+- [ ] Performance metrics fall below thresholds
+- [ ] Security vulnerabilities discovered
+- [ ] Business requirements change significantly
+- [ ] Technology landscape shifts materially
+- [ ] Team capabilities change substantially
+
+### 8.3 Success Criteria Validation
+| Success Criteria | Target | Actual | Status | Notes |
+|------------------|---------|---------|--------|-------|
+| _{Criteria 1}_ | _{Target 1}_ | _{TBD}_ | _{Pending}_ | _{Track post-implementation}_ |
+| _{Criteria 2}_ | _{Target 2}_ | _{TBD}_ | _{Pending}_ | _{Track post-implementation}_ |
+| _{Criteria 3}_ | _{Target 3}_ | _{TBD}_ | _{Pending}_ | _{Track post-implementation}_ |
+
+### 8.4 Evolution Path
+**Next Logical Steps:**
+1. _{Follow-up decision or improvement}_
+2. _{Additional optimization opportunity}_
+3. _{Future architectural evolution}_
+
+**Deprecation Plan:**
+- **Trigger:** _{Conditions that would obsolete this decision}_
+- **Timeline:** _{Expected lifespan of this decision}_
+- **Successor:** _{Likely replacement approach}_
+
+---
+
+## 📚 9. Related Decisions & References
+
+### 9.1 Related ADRs
+- **ADR-{X}:** _{Related decision that influenced this one}_
+- **ADR-{Y}:** _{Decision that this one influences}_
+- **ADR-{Z}:** _{Conflicting decision that was resolved}_
+
+### 9.2 Supporting Documentation
+- **Architecture Diagrams:** _{Link to technical diagrams}_
+- **Proof of Concept:** _{Link to prototype or spike results}_
+- **Performance Benchmarks:** _{Link to test results}_
+- **Security Analysis:** _{Link to security review}_
+
+### 9.3 External References
+- **Standards:** _{Industry standards or best practices followed}_
+- **Research Papers:** _{Academic or industry research supporting decision}_
+- **Vendor Documentation:** _{Third-party tool or service documentation}_
+- **Community Discussions:** _{Stack Overflow, GitHub, forums}_
+
+### 9.4 Decision Artifacts
+```
+artifacts/
+├── performance-benchmarks/
+│   ├── current-state-metrics.json
+│   ├── option1-benchmark.json
+│   └── option2-benchmark.json
+├── prototypes/
+│   ├── option1-poc/
+│   └── option2-poc/
+└── analysis/
+    ├── cost-benefit-analysis.xlsx
+    └── risk-assessment.md
+```
+
+---
+
+## 👥 10. Stakeholder Sign-off
+
+### 10.1 Review Process
+| Role | Reviewer | Date | Status | Comments |
+|------|----------|------|--------|----------|
+| **Architecture Review Board** | _{Name}_ | _{Date}_ | _{Approved/Pending}_ | _{Link to feedback}_ |
+| **Technical Lead** | _{Name}_ | _{Date}_ | _{Approved/Pending}_ | _{Technical concerns addressed}_ |
+| **Product Owner** | _{Name}_ | _{Date}_ | _{Approved/Pending}_ | _{Business alignment confirmed}_ |
+| **Security Team** | _{Name}_ | _{Date}_ | _{Approved/Pending}_ | _{Security implications reviewed}_ |
+| **DevOps Lead** | _{Name}_ | _{Date}_ | _{Approved/Pending}_ | _{Operational feasibility confirmed}_ |
+
+### 10.2 Approval Status
+- [ ] **Technical Review:** Architecture team approval
+- [ ] **Business Review:** Product owner approval
+- [ ] **Security Review:** Security team clearance
+- [ ] **Operational Review:** DevOps team readiness
+- [ ] **Final Approval:** Decision authority sign-off
+
+### 10.3 Communication Plan
+**Announcement:**
+- [ ] Engineering team notification
+- [ ] Stakeholder update email
+- [ ] Architecture decision log update
+- [ ] Documentation wiki update
+
+**Training:**
+- [ ] Technical team training sessions
+- [ ] Documentation and runbooks
+- [ ] Q&A sessions scheduled
+
+---
+
+## 📋 11. Implementation Checklist
+
+### 11.1 Pre-Implementation
+- [ ] All stakeholder approvals obtained
+- [ ] Implementation plan detailed and resourced
+- [ ] Risk mitigation strategies in place
+- [ ] Success metrics and monitoring defined
+- [ ] Rollback plan documented and tested
+
+### 11.2 Implementation
+- [ ] Development work completed according to plan
+- [ ] Testing completed (unit, integration, performance)
+- [ ] Documentation updated
+- [ ] Team training completed
+- [ ] Monitoring and alerting configured
+
+### 11.3 Post-Implementation
+- [ ] Success metrics validated
+- [ ] Performance baselines established
+- [ ] Lessons learned documented
+- [ ] Review schedule established
+- [ ] Next steps identified
+
+---
+
+**📝 ADR Status:** _{Current status with date}_
+**🔄 Next Review:** _{Date for next scheduled review}_
+**👤 Decision Owner:** _{Person responsible for decision implementation}_
+**📞 Contact:** _{Email/Slack for questions about this decision}_
+
+> **Note:** This ADR should be treated as a living document during the Proposed phase and locked once Accepted. All changes after acceptance should trigger a new ADR that either supersedes or extends this decision.