Working template

Complexity review

A companion to Boring where boring is an advantage.

Download the text file to fill it in with your own details, or print a blank copy.

Use this brief before retaining a new service, integration, or exception. The purpose is to make its continuing attention visible.

Proposed change / owner:  

Reviewer (someone other than the builder):   Date:  

Capability added:  

Work, component, or exception removed:  

Estimated attention per month once running (hours, by whom):  

New dependency Why needed Who understands it How failure is detected How it is recovered How it is updated or patched

Questions for the decision

  • Can another person explain the normal path using the documentation?
  • Which new accounts, renewals, credentials, or provider interfaces need attention?
  • Does this create another authoritative copy of information?
  • What happens when the original builder is unavailable?
  • What is the simplest alternative that meets most of the need, and why was it rejected?
  • What would cause the team to simplify or retire it?

Evidence checked

  • [ ] Documentation exists in the agreed location and was read by the reviewer, not only the builder.
  • [ ] Credentials are in approved storage and are not tied to the builder's personal identity.
  • [ ] Monitoring or a periodic check exists that would reveal silent failure.
  • [ ] The change is recorded in the service ownership map or inventory.
  • [ ] If this is an exception to a standard, the standard it departs from and the compensating measure are written down.

Benefit that justifies the added responsibility:  

Experiment boundary, access, and end date:  

Decision: retain / revise / continue experiment / retire

Decision owner / next review:  

Retirement or recovery path:  

Register of retained complexity

Keep one line per retained item so the total is visible at each review.

Item Retained since Owner Monthly attention Last reviewed Retire trigger

Common failure modes

  • Experiments never end because nobody set an end date.
  • The exception becomes the standard without anyone deciding so.
  • Attention cost is counted only for the builder, not for support, security, and successors.
  • Retirement is agreed but the accounts, credentials, and data remain.

This review covers ongoing attention. It does not replace the vendor review or the security review for the new component.