The importance of software architecture design decisions has been known for almost 20 years. Knowledge vaporisation is a problem in many projects, especially in the current fast-paced culture, where developers often switch from project to another. Documenting software architecture design decisions helps developers understand the software better and make informed decisions in the future. However, documenting architecture design decisions is highly undervalued. It does not create any revenue in itself, and it is often the disliked and therefore neglected part of the job. This literature review explores what methods, tools and practices are being suggested in the scientific literature, as well as, what practitioners are recommending within the grey literature. What makes these methods good or bad is also investigated. The review covers the past five years and 36 analysed papers. The evidence gathered shows that most of the scientific literature concentrates on developing tools to aid the documentation process. Twelve out of nineteen grey literature papers concentrate on Architecture Decision Records (ADR). ADRs are small template files, which as a collection describe the architecture of the entire system. The ADRs appear to be what practitioners have become used to using over the past decade, as they were first introduced in 2011. What is seen as beneficial in a method or tool is low-cost and low-effort, while producing concise, good quality content. What is seen as a drawback is high-cost, high-effort and producing too much or badly organised content. The suitability of a method or tool depends on the project itself and its requirements
