# Domain Docs How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when exploring the codebase. ## Before exploring, read these - **`CONTEXT.md`** at the repo root, or - **`CONTEXT-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists: it points at one `CONTEXT.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic. - **`docs/authoritative/adr/`**: read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src//docs/authoritative/adr/` for context-scoped decisions. The rest of `docs/authoritative/` holds current product design, contracts, and constraints. - **`docs/evidence/`**: curated observations that inform a foundational design decision. Read a record when you need to understand or challenge the decision it supports; it informs that decision but never overrides the authoritative document. Its `README.md` sets what qualifies. - **`docs/historical/`**: superseded designs, archived handoffs, and development records, including one issue's retained work under `docs/historical/issue-notes//`. Read these to understand how the project arrived at its current state — never as current behavior. If any of these files don't exist, **proceed silently**. Don't flag their absence; don't suggest creating them upfront. The `/domain-modeling` skill (reached via `/grill-with-docs` and `/improve-codebase-architecture`) creates them lazily when terms or decisions actually get resolved; `/cleanup`-bound work moves superseded context into `docs/historical/` per `docs/agents/standards.md`. ## File structure Single-context repo (most repos): ``` / ├── CONTEXT.md ├── docs/ │ ├── authoritative/adr/ │ │ ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md │ │ └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md │ ├── evidence/ ← foundational design evidence │ └── historical/issue-notes/186/ ← one issue's retained records └── src/ ``` Multi-context repo (presence of `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root): ``` / ├── CONTEXT-MAP.md ├── docs/authoritative/adr/ ← system-wide decisions └── src/ ├── ordering/ │ ├── CONTEXT.md │ └── docs/authoritative/adr/ ← context-specific decisions └── billing/ ├── CONTEXT.md └── docs/authoritative/adr/ ``` ## Use the glossary's vocabulary When your output names a domain concept (in an issue title, a refactor proposal, a hypothesis, a test name), use the term as defined in `CONTEXT.md`. Don't drift to synonyms the glossary explicitly avoids. If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal: either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`). ## Flag ADR conflicts If your output contradicts an existing ADR, surface it explicitly rather than silently overriding: > _Contradicts ADR-0007 (event-sourced orders), but worth reopening because…_