One Size Fits All? An Empirical Comparison of ADR Templates regarding Comprehension, Usability, and Ease of Adoption
Fernando Nogueira, Nabson Silva, Tayana Conte

TL;DR
This study empirically compares various ADR templates to determine which best supports understanding, usability, and adoption, highlighting Nygard's template as the most effective based on expert and user evaluations.
Contribution
It provides an evidence-based comparison of ADR templates, offering guidance for practitioners on selecting templates aligned with project needs.
Findings
Nygard's template outperformed MADR in controlled experiments.
Expert evaluation ranked Nygard and MADR as top templates.
Qualitative feedback identified factors influencing template preference.
Abstract
Context: Documenting Architectural Design Decisions (ADDs) is a critical factor in the software lifecycle, essential for efficient system maintenance, developer onboarding, and preventing knowledge vaporization. Although various templates for Architectural Decision Records (ADRs) have been proposed, there is a lack of empirical evidence comparing them. Goal: To address this gap, this paper aims to identify which ADR template best supports comprehension, usability, and ease of adoption: Tyree/Akerman's template, Nygard's ADR, arc42, Y-statements, and MADR. Method: We compared these templates using the DESMET FA method in a two-step evaluation. First, the two primary authors evaluated the five templates through the DESMET FA, based on their software architecture expertise. The two top-performing templates were then used as treatments in a controlled experiment conducted with…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
