Record and track organizational decisions using the RAPID framework. Captures decision context, options analysis, RAPID roles, risk assessment, and communication plan. Use when making cross-functional decisions, documenting governance choices, or building an auditable decision trail.
インストール方法を見るインストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
| Element | Description |
|---|---|
| Decision ID | DEC-YYYY-NNN |
| Title | One-line description |
| Category | Strategic / Tactical / Operational |
| Urgency | Critical (24h) / High (1 week) / Normal (2 weeks) / Low |
| Reversibility | Easy / Moderate / Difficult / Irreversible |
| Scope | Who and what is affected |
Assign clear decision roles:
| Role | Person | Responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| R — Recommend | [Name] | Researches, proposes recommendation |
| A — Agree | [Names] | Must agree before approval (has veto) |
| P — Perform | [Names] | Implements the decision |
| I — Input | [Names] | Provides data/perspective (no veto) |
| D — Decide | [Name] | Makes the final call (ONE person) |
Rule: Exactly one D. Multiple A/P/I are fine.
| Criterion | Option A | Option B | Option C (Status Quo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | $50K | $30K | $0 |
| Time to implement | 3 months | 6 months | — |
| Risk | Low | Medium | High (doing nothing) |
| Alignment with strategy | High | Medium | Low |
| Option | Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Vendor lock-in | Medium | High | Contractual exit clause |
| B | Team capacity | High | Medium | Phase rollout |
Decision: We will proceed with Option A
Rationale: Best alignment with strategy, acceptable cost, low risk
Trade-offs accepted: Higher cost than Option B
Conditions: Must complete vendor contract review by [date]
Review date: [6 months from now]
| Audience | Channel | Timing | Message |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership | Email summary | Day 1 | Decision + rationale |
| Affected teams | Team meeting | Day 2 | Impact + timeline |
| Broader org | Slack / Newsletter | Day 5 | High-level announcement |
| Input | Required | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Decision topic | Yes | What is being decided |
| Options | Yes | At least 2 including status quo |
| Stakeholders | Yes | Who is affected / involved |
| Constraints | Recommended | Timeline, budget, dependencies |
## Decision Record — DEC-2024-012
### Migrate Primary Database to PostgreSQL
**Status:** Accepted | **Date:** 2024-03-15
**Decided by:** CTO | **Recommended by:** Platform Lead
### RAPID
[Roles table]
### Options Considered
[Comparison matrix]
### Decision
We will migrate to PostgreSQL 16 managed on AWS RDS.
### Rationale
- Team expertise (8/10 engineers proficient)
- 40% cost reduction vs current Oracle license
- Acceptable migration risk with phased approach
### Communication Plan
[Audience → Channel → Timing table]
| Check | Question |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Do referenced frameworks and standards match their official definitions? |
| Completeness | Are all key concepts covered without significant gaps for the stated audience? |
| Context-fit | Would this be useful for someone new to this domain, or is it too advanced/too basic? |
| Consequence | If a stakeholder acted on this immediately, what could they misinterpret? |
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Design rigorous A/B test plans with hypothesis, sample size calculation, Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE), randomization strategy, and decision rules. Includes guardrail metrics and rollout playbook. Use when planning product experiments, conversion optimization, or data-driven feature decisions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review REST and GraphQL API designs for consistency, usability, and best practices. Covers naming conventions, versioning strategy, error format, pagination, authentication patterns, and breaking change detection. Use when reviewing API specs, designing new APIs, or auditing existing endpoints.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following the Michael Nygard format. Captures context, options considered, decision rationale, and consequences. Use when making technology choices, framework selections, or any architectural decision that future developers need to understand.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Assess organizational readiness for financial audits (internal or external). Map assertions to account balances, check evidence completeness, score readiness using a Red/Amber/Green framework, and generate a remediation timeline. Aligned with SOX, IFRS, and GAAP audit standards. Use before scheduled audits or when preparing for first-time compliance.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Design safe recurring Codex automations with clear prompts, outputs, schedules, and gating rules.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Refine Product Backlog Items to meet INVEST criteria. Write User Stories with Acceptance Criteria in Given/When/Then format, estimate with Story Points, and flag dependencies. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need grooming. Do not use to prioritize the backlog — that is the Product Owner's decision.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。