adr-writelisted

# adr-write A technical decision was made. This writes the record **with** the user rather than handing them a template - they say what they remember, the agent drafts, they correct. ## Is it an ADR at all? Three questions, in this order: 1. **Would someone reasonably have chosen otherwise?** If not, it is a convention, and it belongs in `AGENTS.md` where the next person will look. One obviously-right answer does not need a record; it needs a line in the rules. 2. **Is it expensive to reverse?** A process tweak - who bumps a version, what a commit message says - is a one-line revert even when contestable: it belongs in `CONTRIBUTING.md`, or `SPEC.md` if normative, not in a full ADR. Reserve the Context/Options/Consequences shape for decisions costly enough that reconstructing *why* matters later - architecture, data model, external contracts, a dependency. 3. **Who would overrule it - an architect or a product owner?** An architect means ADR. A product owner means **BDR** and `bdr-write` is the skill. The test itself is R5, and the standard works it through in [decision records (by reference)](https://github.com/repository-standards/core/blob/main/docs/tree/docs-decision-records.md). If both would overrule it, write the BDR and let the ADR reference it. Say which way you routed and why, in one line. A user who disagrees will say so, and that is cheaper than discovering it in review. ## As short as the decision actually is Length is a cost, no