Enterprise architecture alignment — capability mapping, domain decomposition, governance, technology radar, and strategic initiative roadmap. Use when the user asks to "map business capabilities", "build a technology radar", "define architecture governance", "prioritize strategic initiatives", "design team topologies", or mentions DDD domains, ARB, DORA metrics, maturity models, or target operating model.
From maonpx claudepluginhub javimontano/mao-discovery-frameworkThis skill is limited to using the following tools:
examples/README.mdexamples/sample-output.htmlexamples/sample-output.mdprompts/metaprompts.mdprompts/use-case-prompts.mdreferences/body-of-knowledge.mdreferences/enterprise-arch-patterns.mdreferences/knowledge-graph.mmdreferences/state-of-the-art.mdConducts market research, competitive analysis, investor diligence, and tech scans with sourced findings, contrarian views, and decision recommendations.
Resolves freight exceptions including delays, damages, losses, and carrier disputes via classification workflows, escalation protocols, claims filing, and carrier-specific strategies.
Builds Manim animations for technical concepts, graphs, system diagrams, and product walkthroughs. Activates for precise animated explainers instead of talking-head scripts.
Enterprise architecture aligns technology initiatives with business strategy. It defines what capabilities the enterprise needs, what technologies support them, how decisions are governed, and how investments are prioritized.
Una empresa sin mapa de capacidades es un ejército sin mapa del terreno. La arquitectura enterprise conecta la estrategia de negocio con la tecnología: qué capacidades necesita la empresa, qué tecnología las soporta, cómo se gobierna, y cómo se prioriza la inversión. Sin esta capa, cada equipo optimiza localmente mientras la empresa se fragmenta.
The user provides an organization or initiative name as $ARGUMENTS. Parse $1 as the enterprise/organization name used throughout all output artifacts.
Parameters:
{MODO}: piloto-auto (default) | desatendido | supervisado | paso-a-paso
{FORMATO}: markdown (default) | html | dual{VARIANTE}: ejecutiva (~40% — S1 capability map + S3 radar + S5 portfolio) | técnica (full 6 sections, default)Before generating architecture, detect organizational context:
!find . -name "*.md" -o -name "*.yaml" -o -name "*.json" | head -20
If reference materials exist, load them:
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/capability-templates.md
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/governance-frameworks.md
Hierarchical decomposition of business capabilities from strategic to operational level.
Structure:
Per capability:
Key outcomes:
Format: Heat map (capability x maturity x color), dependency matrix
Decomposes the enterprise into cohesive domains using Domain-Driven Design principles.
Bounded Contexts:
Context Mapping:
Domain Ownership:
Key decisions:
Guides technology adoption across the enterprise (ThoughtWorks-style).
Classification:
Dimensions: Platforms, Languages, Frameworks, Data, Infrastructure, Architectural Patterns, Security & Compliance
Per technology:
Principles:
Framework for making and enforcing architecture decisions.
Architectural Principles: Long-lived, guide decision-making
Standards & Patterns: API design, logging (structured, correlation IDs), deployment (blue-green, canary), database selection criteria
Architecture Review Board (ARB):
Approval Process:
Compliance & Audit:
Prioritized list of strategic initiatives aligned with business objectives and capability gaps.
Per initiative:
Portfolio Analysis:
Principles:
How the organization is structured and operates to deliver and manage architecture.
Organizational Structure (Team Topologies):
Funding Model: Product funding per capability, platform shared budget, CapEx vs. OpEx
Delivery Cadence: Sprint length, release cadence, ceremonies
Decision Rights: Strategic (CTO), Tactical (ARB), Operational (Teams)
Metrics & Accountability:
| Decision | Enables | Constrains | When to Use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud-First | Scalability, flexibility, innovation speed | Vendor lock-in, compliance complexity, cost | Digital-native orgs, variable workloads |
| Build vs. Buy | Control, differentiation | Higher cost, longer time-to-market | Core domains, competitive advantage |
| Microservices | Independent scaling, tech diversity, autonomy | Ops complexity, distributed debugging | Large teams, high-scale, polyglot |
| Monolithic | Simple operations, single deployment, consistency | Tight coupling, hard to scale independently | Small teams, simple domains |
| Centralized Data Warehouse | Single source of truth, analytics, governance | ETL complexity, latency, tight coupling | Traditional BI, regulatory reporting |
| Decentralized Data Lakes | Agility, quick onboarding, independent optimization | Inconsistency, data quality, governance burden | Data science, exploratory analytics |
| Governance (Heavy) | Control, compliance, consistency | Slow decisions, innovation risk, friction | Regulated industries, large enterprises |
| Governance (Light) | Speed, innovation, team autonomy | Chaos, technical debt, inconsistency | Startups, small teams, fast-moving |
| Caso | Estrategia de Manejo |
|---|---|
| Legacy enterprise con deuda tecnica masiva y >50 sistemas en produccion | Capability map retroactivo desde sistemas existentes. Priorizar modernizacion por valor de negocio (Pareto: 20% de sistemas = 80% valor). Parallel running durante transicion. No big-bang. |
| Startup en crecimiento rapido sin governance previo | Introducir governance gradualmente. Empezar con technology radar y principios arquitectonicos (3-5 maximos). ARB ligero (async reviews). Evitar burocracia prematura que frene innovacion. |
| Fusion o adquisicion con dos stacks tecnologicos incompatibles | Capability analysis separada por empresa. Identificar sinergias (shared kernel). Roadmap de integracion phased: datos primero, plataforma despues, aplicaciones ultimo. Domain model por region si regulacion difiere. |
| Organizacion multi-geografica con regulaciones divergentes (GDPR, CCPA, LGPD) | Arquitectura con regional customization. Domain model per region con shared kernel para capabilities comunes. Compliance controls mapeados a controles de arquitectura por jurisdiccion. |
| Decision | Alternativa Descartada | Justificacion |
|---|---|---|
| Capability map como eje organizador sobre inventario de sistemas | Inventario de aplicaciones como base de analisis | Los sistemas cambian; las capacidades del negocio persisten. Organizar por capability permite razonar sobre inversion en terminos de negocio, no de tecnologia. |
| Technology radar advisory (Adopt/Trial/Assess/Hold) sobre mandatos tecnologicos | Lista de tecnologias aprobadas con prohibicion de alternativas | Mandatos generan shadow IT y resentimiento. Radar advisory guia decisiones respetando autonomia de equipos. Platform team facilita, no impone. |
| Team topologies (stream-aligned, platform, enabling) sobre equipos funcionales | Organizacion por funcion (frontend, backend, QA, ops) | Conway's Law: estructura org = estructura sistema. Equipos stream-aligned reducen handoffs y aceleran delivery. Equipos funcionales crean silos y dependencias. |
graph TD
subgraph Core
EA[enterprise-architecture]
end
subgraph Inputs
STR[Business Strategy & Objectives] --> EA
CAPS[Current Capability Baseline] --> EA
TECH[Technology Landscape Inventory] --> EA
end
subgraph Outputs
EA --> CMAP[Capability Map with Maturity]
EA --> RADAR[Technology Radar]
EA --> PORT[Initiative Portfolio]
EA --> TOM[Target Operating Model]
end
subgraph Related Skills
EA -.-> SA[software-architecture]
EA -.-> SOL[solutions-architecture]
EA -.-> IA[infrastructure-architecture]
EA -.-> DSO[devsecops-architecture]
end
Formato MD (default):
# Enterprise Architecture: {organization_name}
## S1: Capability Map
- Heat map (capability x maturity x color)
- Dependency matrix
## S2: Domain Model (DDD)
- Bounded contexts, context mapping
## S3: Technology Radar
- Adopt/Trial/Assess/Hold per dimension
## S4-S6: [remaining sections]
## Anexos: ARB charter, initiative scorecards, DORA metrics baseline
Formato PPTX (secondary):
Formato HTML (bajo demanda):
A-03_Enterprise_Architecture_{cliente}_{WIP}.htmlFormato DOCX (bajo demanda):
A-03_Enterprise_Architecture_{cliente}_{WIP}.docxFormato XLSX (bajo demanda):
{fase}_{entregable}_{cliente}_{WIP}.xlsx| Dimension | Peso | Criterio | Umbral Minimo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trigger Accuracy | 10% | El skill se activa correctamente ante menciones de capability map, radar, governance, DDD domains, team topologies | 7/10 |
| Completeness | 25% | Las 6 secciones cubren capabilities, domains, radar, governance, portfolio, y operating model | 7/10 |
| Clarity | 20% | Cada capability con maturity score justificado. Radar entries con rationale. Initiative portfolio con scoring transparente. | 7/10 |
| Robustness | 20% | Edge cases de legacy, M&A, multi-geo cubiertos. Governance proporcional al riesgo. Portfolio <20 iniciativas (focus). | 7/10 |
| Efficiency | 10% | Output proporcional al contexto (ejecutiva vs tecnica). Sin overlap con skills de arquitectura especifica. | 7/10 |
| Value Density | 15% | Capability gaps accionables. Radar entries con alternatives. Initiative portfolio con ROI estimado. | 7/10 |
Umbral minimo global: 7/10. Deliverables por debajo requieren re-work antes de entrega.
Legacy Enterprise with Technical Debt: Capabilities supported by outdated tech. Modernization competes with new feature development. Prioritize highest-value, lowest-cost improvements; parallel running during transition.
Multi-Geographic or Multi-Regulatory: Different regions have different compliance (GDPR EU, CCPA California). Architecture must accommodate regional customization. Domain model per region, shared kernel for common capabilities.
High-Growth Startup Becoming Enterprise: "Move fast, break things" needs governance. Retrospective capability mapping, gradual governance introduction, strategic initiative prioritization.
Merger or Acquisition: Two enterprises with different architectures, technologies, governance. Capability analysis for synergies, phased integration roadmap, shared platform investments.
Digital Transformation Initiative: High visibility, multiple stakeholders, cross-cutting impact. Clear vision, phased capability evolution, frequent communication, quick wins early.
Before finalizing delivery, verify:
| Format | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
markdown | Yes | Rich Markdown + Mermaid diagrams. Token-efficient. |
html | On demand | Branded HTML (Design System). Visual impact. |
dual | On demand | Both formats. |
Default output is Markdown with embedded Mermaid diagrams. HTML generation requires explicit {FORMATO}=html parameter.
Primary: A-03_Enterprise_Architecture_Deep.html — Executive summary, capability map, domain model, technology radar, governance framework, initiative portfolio, target operating model.
Secondary: Capability heat map (PNG/SVG), technology radar visualization, strategic roadmap (Gantt), governance flowchart, metrics dashboard.
Autor: Javier Montaño | Última actualización: 12 de marzo de 2026