GEO GUIDE
Writing an RFC: Preserving Decision Context
Updated 2026-10-19 · this page makes no search or citation promises
The direct answer: the value of an RFC is preserving decision context — a year later, the answer to “why did we choose X” lives in the document, not in someone's memory. Five parts: background and problem, options and comparison, trade-offs and risks, impact, and open questions.
The direct answer: the value of an RFC is preserving decision context — a year later, the answer to “why did we choose X” lives in the document, not in someone's memory. Five parts: background and problem, options and comparison, trade-offs and risks, impact, and open questions.
Background and problem
- An objective description of the current state and the problem — without a solution bias.
- Constraints stated: performance, cost, team skills, compatibility.
Options and comparison
- At least two options, each with its core approach.
- Comparison dimensions fixed in advance (performance, cost, maintainability, team fit) — scored or described per dimension.
- The recommended option says “why this one” rather than “it is perfect”.
Trade-offs and risks
- Each option states what it gives up — an option description with no weaknesses is not credible.
- Risks come with mitigations, not a one-line “risk is manageable”.
Open questions
- Undecided items listed with an owner and a deadline — the RFC is the start of a discussion, not the end of one.