Domain Docs

How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when exploring the codebase.

This is a multi-context repo (Yarn workspaces monorepo under packages/*).

Before exploring, read these

• CONTEXT-MAP.md at the repo root — it points at one CONTEXT.md per context (package/area). Read each one relevant to the topic.
• The per-context CONTEXT.md for the package you're working in (e.g. packages/core/database/CONTEXT.md).
• docs/adr/ at the repo root — system-wide decisions. Also check context-scoped decisions under packages/<context>/docs/adr/.

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.

File structure

Multi-context repo (presence of CONTEXT-MAP.md at the root):

/
├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
├── docs/adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
└── packages/
    ├── core/
    │   ├── database/
    │   │   ├── CONTEXT.md
    │   │   └── docs/adr/              ← context-specific decisions
    │   └── content-manager/
    │       ├── CONTEXT.md
    │       └── docs/adr/
    └── plugins/
        └── users-permissions/
            ├── CONTEXT.md
            └── docs/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 the relevant 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…