From project-starter
Designs software architecture and selects patterns like layered, clean, and hexagonal based on project size, team, and needs. Includes checklists for decisions on monoliths vs. microservices.
npx claudepluginhub cloudai-x/claude-workflow-v2 --plugin project-starterThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
- **Trigger**: System design, module structure, new project scaffolding, choosing architecture patterns
Generates design tokens/docs from CSS/Tailwind/styled-components codebases, audits visual consistency across 10 dimensions, detects AI slop in UI.
Records polished WebM UI demo videos of web apps using Playwright with cursor overlay, natural pacing, and three-phase scripting. Activates for demo, walkthrough, screen recording, or tutorial requests.
Delivers idiomatic Kotlin patterns for null safety, immutability, sealed classes, coroutines, Flows, extensions, DSL builders, and Gradle DSL. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or designing Kotlin code.
Copy this checklist and track progress:
Architecture Design Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Understand requirements and constraints
- [ ] Step 2: Assess project size and team capabilities
- [ ] Step 3: Select architecture pattern
- [ ] Step 4: Define directory structure
- [ ] Step 5: Document trade-offs and decision
- [ ] Step 6: Validate against decision framework
| Size | Recommended Pattern |
|---|---|
| Small (<10K LOC) | Simple MVC/Layered |
| Medium (10K-100K) | Clean Architecture |
| Large (>100K) | Modular Monolith or Microservices |
| Team | Recommended |
|---|---|
| 1-3 devs | Monolith with clear modules |
| 4-10 devs | Modular Monolith |
| 10+ devs | Microservices (if justified) |
┌─────────────────────────────┐
│ Presentation │ ← UI, API Controllers
├─────────────────────────────┤
│ Application │ ← Use Cases, Services
├─────────────────────────────┤
│ Domain │ ← Business Logic, Entities
├─────────────────────────────┤
│ Infrastructure │ ← Database, External APIs
└─────────────────────────────┘
Use when: Simple CRUD apps, small teams, quick prototypes
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Frameworks & Drivers │
│ ┌─────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Interface Adapters │ │
│ │ ┌─────────────────────┐ │ │
│ │ │ Application │ │ │
│ │ │ ┌─────────────┐ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ Domain │ │ │ │
│ │ │ └─────────────┘ │ │ │
│ │ └─────────────────────┘ │ │
│ └─────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
Use when: Complex business logic, long-lived projects, testability is key
┌──────────┐
│ HTTP API │
└────┬─────┘
│ Port
┌────────▼────────┐
│ │
│ Application │
│ Core │
│ │
└────────┬────────┘
│ Port
┌────▼─────┐
│ Database │
└──────────┘
Use when: Need to swap external dependencies, multiple entry points
Producer → Event Bus → Consumer
│
├─→ Consumer
│
└─→ Consumer
Use when: Loose coupling needed, async processing, scalability
┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐
│ Commands │ │ Queries │
│ (Write) │ │ (Read) │
└──────┬──────┘ └──────┬──────┘
│ │
▼ ▼
Write Model Read Model
│ │
└────────┬───────────┘
▼
Event Store
Use when: Different read/write scaling, complex domains, event sourcing
src/
├── features/
│ ├── users/
│ │ ├── api/
│ │ ├── components/
│ │ ├── hooks/
│ │ ├── services/
│ │ └── types/
│ └── orders/
│ ├── api/
│ ├── components/
│ └── ...
├── shared/
│ ├── components/
│ ├── hooks/
│ └── utils/
└── app/
└── ...
src/
├── controllers/
├── services/
├── models/
├── repositories/
└── utils/
When making architectural decisions, evaluate against these criteria:
Use this template to document architectural decisions:
## Decision: [What we're deciding]
### Context
[Why this decision is needed now]
### Options Considered
1. Option A: [Description]
2. Option B: [Description]
### Trade-offs
| Criteria | Option A | Option B |
| ---------------- | -------- | -------- |
| Complexity | Low | High |
| Scalability | Medium | High |
| Team familiarity | High | Low |
### Decision
We chose [Option] because [reasoning].
### Consequences
- [What this enables]
- [What this constrains]
After selecting an architecture, validate against:
Architecture Validation:
- [ ] Matches project size and complexity
- [ ] Aligns with team skills and experience
- [ ] Supports current requirements
- [ ] Allows for anticipated growth
- [ ] Dependencies flow inward (core has no external deps)
- [ ] Clear boundaries between modules/layers
- [ ] Testing strategy is feasible
- [ ] Trade-offs are documented
If validation fails, reconsider the pattern selection or adjust the implementation approach.