architecture/old/skills/arch-review-repo/SKILL.md

name, description, model, argument-hint, context, user-invocable

name	description	model	argument-hint	context	user-invocable
arch-review-repo	Perform a full architecture review of the current repository. Analyzes structure, patterns, dependencies, and generates prioritized recommendations. Use when reviewing architecture, auditing codebase, or when user says /arch-review-repo.	opus		fork	true

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:

   ## 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