Add /arch-review-repo command for repository architecture reviews

Creates a new command that spawns the software-architect agent to perform
comprehensive architecture audits. The command analyzes directory structure,
package organization, patterns, anti-patterns, dependencies, and test coverage,
then presents prioritized recommendations with a health score.

Closes #58

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit was merged in pull request #65.
This commit is contained in:
2026-01-10 01:05:47 +01:00
parent c27659f1dd
commit 3a64d68889

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
---
description: Perform a full architecture review of the current repository. Analyzes structure, patterns, dependencies, and generates prioritized recommendations.
argument-hint:
context: fork
---
# Architecture Review
@~/.claude/skills/software-architecture/SKILL.md
## Process
1. **Identify the repository**: Use the current working directory as the repository path.
2. **Spawn the software-architect agent** for deep analysis:
```
ANALYSIS_TYPE: repo-audit
TARGET: <repository-path>
CONTEXT: Full repository architecture review
```
The agent will:
- Analyze directory structure and package organization
- Identify patterns and anti-patterns in the codebase
- Assess dependency graph and module boundaries
- Review test coverage approach
- Generate structured findings with prioritized recommendations
3. **Present the results** to the user in this format:
```markdown
## Repository Architecture Review: <repo-name>
### Structure: <Good|Needs Work>
- [Key observations about package organization]
- [Directory structure assessment]
- [Naming conventions evaluation]
### Patterns Identified
- [Positive patterns found in the codebase]
- [Architectural styles detected (layered, hexagonal, etc.)]
### Anti-Patterns Detected
- [Anti-pattern name]: [Location and description]
- [Anti-pattern name]: [Location and description]
### Concerns
- [Specific issues that need attention]
- [Technical debt areas]
### Recommendations (prioritized)
1. **P0 - Critical**: [Most urgent recommendation]
2. **P1 - High**: [Important improvement]
3. **P2 - Medium**: [Nice-to-have improvement]
4. **P3 - Low**: [Minor optimization]
### Health Score: <A|B|C|D|F>
[Brief justification for the grade]
```
4. **Offer follow-up actions**:
- Create issues for critical findings
- Generate a detailed report
- Review specific components in more depth
## Guidelines
- Be specific: Reference exact files, packages, and locations
- Be actionable: Every finding should have a clear path to resolution
- Be balanced: Acknowledge what the codebase does well
- Be proportionate: Focus on high-impact issues first
- Stay objective: Focus on patterns and principles, not style preferences