# Domain Docs

How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when exploring the
codebase. Layout: **single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` plus `docs/adr/` at the repo root.

## Before exploring, read these

- **`CONTEXT.md`** at the repo root — the glossary / ubiquitous language.
- **`docs/adr/`** — read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in.

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.

Neither exists yet in this repo. The existing `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md` and `docs/design-system.md`
carry the current architecture and design law — read those regardless.

## File structure

```
/
├── CONTEXT.md
├── docs/adr/
│   ├── 0001-....md
│   └── 0002-....md
├── backend/
└── userscript/
```

If this repo ever splits into genuinely separate contexts, add a root `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing at
one `CONTEXT.md` per context and update this file.

## 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-0002 (…) — but worth reopening because…_