Domain Modeling

Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the active discipline: challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely reading docs/glossary.md for vocabulary is not this skill: that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)

File structure

This repo keeps its domain model under docs/. There is no CONTEXT.md or CONTEXT-MAP.md; never create one.

/
├── AGENTS.md                  ← repo-wide agent rules
└── docs/
    ├── glossary.md            ← the domain language (one table)
    ├── conventions/           ← naming and coding rules, per area
    ├── adr/                   ← decisions (template in README.md)
    ├── explanation/           ← rationale behind a subsystem
    └── reference/
        └── architecture.md    ← system shape: components, flows, layout

Before a session, skim the glossary and any ADRs already filed for the area. For why/how questions that span several components, delegate to the architecture-explainer subagent rather than re-reading docs in the main context.

During the session

Challenge against the glossary

When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in docs/glossary.md, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y. Which is it?"

Sharpen fuzzy language

When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account': do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."

Discuss concrete scenarios

When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.

Cross-reference with code

When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees (docs/reference/architecture.md maps where each component lives). If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible. Which is right?"

Update the glossary inline

When a term is resolved, update docs/glossary.md right there. Don't batch these up: capture them as they happen. Use the format in CONTEXT-FORMAT.md.

The glossary should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat it as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else. What resolves outside the glossary goes where it already lives:

• Naming or structure rule? The relevant doc in docs/conventions/.
• Rationale for how a subsystem works? The relevant docs/explanation/<topic>.md.
• System shape has drifted from reality? docs/reference/architecture.md.

Offer ADRs sparingly

Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:

1. Hard to reverse: the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
2. Surprising without context: a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
3. The result of a real trade-off: there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons

If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in ADR-FORMAT.md.