diff --git a/docs/decisions/ADR-0014-Discovery-in-open-standard-formats-as-a-pluggable-adapter.md b/docs/decisions/ADR-0014-Discovery-in-open-standard-formats-as-a-pluggable-adapter.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..48cc1cf0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/decisions/ADR-0014-Discovery-in-open-standard-formats-as-a-pluggable-adapter.md
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+# ADR-0014: Discovery emitted in open-standard formats, as a pluggable adapter
+
+## Status
+
+Proposed
+
+## Date
+
+2026-05-29
+
+## Context
+
+An OlonJS tenant already emits an agent-facing discovery surface, but mostly in
+custom shapes: a custom JSON-LD `additionalType: "mcp-manifest"`, an
+`mcp-manifest.json` of `kind: "olonjs-mcp-manifest-index"`, alongside standard
+`robots.txt`, `sitemap.xml` and `llms.txt`.
+
+This forces an agent that already speaks the open standards to learn an OlonJS
+dialect to discover what is, structurally, generic information.
+
+A tenant is a site, not a running server: it cannot itself be an MCP server. It
+can expose WebMCP tools from the browser. The discovery surface in scope here is
+the static description an agent reads to find and orient on the site. The
+authenticated operation surface (the OAuth-scoped MCP Gateway) lives in
+`platform` and is out of scope.
+
+A second force: today the full agent-readiness of a site depends on `platform`.
+A plain core/OSS tenant has no standard discovery surface of its own. Discovery
+is static, build-time information; there is no technical reason for it to be
+coupled to `platform` or to the framework runtime.
+
+This ADR is spawned by RFC #1 (Pillar 3 and Pillar 5).
+
+## Decision
+
+Express the tenant's static discovery surface in open standards rather than
+custom `olonjs-*` formats, and emit it through a pluggable adapter rather than
+logic hard-wired into the framework.
+
+In scope for the tenant-site discovery surface:
+
+- RFC 9309 robots (keep)
+- Sitemaps protocol (keep)
+- llms.txt convention (keep)
+- schema.org JSON-LD, dropping the custom `additionalType`
+- RFC 8288 HTTP `Link` headers
+- RFC 9264 linkset
+- MCP Server Card / SEP-2127, replacing the custom `olonjs-mcp-manifest-index`
+- A2A `.well-known` card, retained alongside the MCP Server Card
+
+The emitter is a pluggable adapter, able to run as a standalone tool, including
+over a non-OlonJS site. Conformance target: the public agent-ready checklist
+(isitagentready.com), passed on first deploy.
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+### Keep the custom `olonjs-*` formats
+
+- Pros: no migration, already shipped.
+- Cons: every agent must learn an OlonJS dialect for generic information; no
+  interoperability with agents that already speak the standards.
+- Why rejected: the custom shapes carry no value the standards don't, and they
+  block interop.
+
+### Replace A2A with the MCP Server Card
+
+- Pros: one discovery protocol, less surface.
+- Cons: bets on MCP winning the agentic-discovery race, which is undecided.
+- Why rejected: both are projected from one source of truth, so carrying both
+  costs little and avoids a premature bet. (Recorded as the hedge below.)
+
+### Emit discovery inside the framework, not as an adapter
+
+- Pros: simpler wiring, one less seam.
+- Cons: couples a generic, portable capability to the framework; excludes the
+  existing-site market that a standalone tool could serve.
+- Why rejected: the discovery surface is the least lock-in part of the system
+  by design; keeping it as an adapter is what lets it run without the framework.
+
+### Include `api-catalog` (RFC 9727) and SVCB/HTTPS (RFC 9460)
+
+- Pros: completes the standards list from the RFC's P2 table.
+- Cons: both are platform/infra concerns. A tenant is a site, not an API host,
+  and SVCB/HTTPS is DNS-level binding.
+- Why rejected: out of scope for a tenant-site discovery surface; revisit as a
+  `platform` decision if needed.
+
+## Consequences
+
+What becomes easier:
+
+- An agent that speaks the standards needs no OlonJS-specific knowledge.
+- Discovery stops depending on `platform`: a plain OSS tenant is agent-ready by
+  construction.
+- The adapter is the least lock-in part of the system, making it portable and
+  the most open to outside contribution.
+
+What becomes harder / new burden:
+
+- The custom `additionalType` and `olonjs-mcp-manifest-index` are retired; any
+  consumer relying on them must migrate.
+- Carrying both A2A and the MCP Server Card is a deliberate hedge; the criterion
+  for collapsing to one (a de facto winner emerging) is left to a future ADR.
+- The emitter is generated per site at build time and is a build output, never
+  committed.
+
+## Follow-ups
+
+- Extract the discovery emitter as the standalone adapter (RFC Phase 1).
+- Define the projection of each standard artifact from the Model (depends on
+  ADR-0015).
+- Decide a criterion for collapsing A2A / MCP Server Card to one protocol.
+
+## Decision Log
+
+- 2026-05-29 — Initial draft, spawned by RFC #1.