| name | architecture-paradigms |
| description | Interactive selector and implementation planner for architecture paradigms. Use when selecting or comparing architecture patterns for a new system. |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| category | architecture-decision |
| tags | architecture, patterns, selection, implementation, adr |
| dependencies | architecture-paradigm-functional-core, architecture-paradigm-hexagonal, architecture-paradigm-cqrs-es, architecture-paradigm-event-driven, architecture-paradigm-layered, architecture-paradigm-modular-monolith, architecture-paradigm-microkernel, architecture-paradigm-microservices, architecture-paradigm-service-based, architecture-paradigm-space-based, architecture-paradigm-pipeline, architecture-paradigm-serverless, architecture-paradigm-client-server |
| tools | paradigm-selector, implementation-planner, compatibility-checker |
| usage_patterns | paradigm-selection, architecture-review, implementation-planning, adr-creation |
| complexity | intermediate |
| estimated_tokens | 560 |
Architecture Paradigm Selector & Implementation Planner
Quick Start
For decisions: Jump to Common Scenarios (below) or use the selection matrix.
For planning: Complete the 3-step workflow to generate implementation roadmaps.
Common Scenarios
Enterprise Application with Multiple Teams
Primary: Microservices or Modular Monolith Secondary: Hexagonal for infrastructure independence
Complex Business Rules & Testing
Primary: Functional Core, Imperative Shell Secondary: Hexagonal for external integrations
Real-time/Event Processing
Primary: Event-Driven Architecture Secondary: CQRS + Event Sourcing for audit trails
Legacy System Modernization
Primary: Hexagonal (Ports & Adapters) Secondary: Modular Monolith as interim step
Cloud-Native/Bursty Workloads
Primary: Serverless Secondary: Microservices for sustained workloads
ETL/Data Processing Pipeline
Primary: Pipeline Architecture Secondary: Event-Driven for streaming
Required TodoWrite Items
paradigms:needs-definedparadigms:paradigms-evaluatedparadigms:roadmap-created
3-Step Selection Workflow
Step 1: Define Your Needs (paradigms:needs-defined)
Primary Concerns (select all):
- Testability: Isolate business logic from infrastructure
- Team Autonomy: Independent deployment capabilities
- Infrastructure Flexibility: Swap databases/frameworks easily
- Real-time Scaling: Variable loads with event processing
- Simplicity: Maintainable without distributed complexity
- Legacy Integration: Work with existing systems
System Context:
- Team Size:
< 5|5-15|15-50|50+ - Domain Complexity:
Simple|Moderate|Complex|Highly Complex
Step 2: Evaluate Paradigms (paradigms:paradigms-evaluated)
Testability & Business Logic
- Primary: Functional Core, Imperative Shell - Isolates business logic from infrastructure
- Alternative: Hexagonal/Ports & Adapters - Clear domain/infrastructure boundaries
Team Autonomy
- Primary: Microservices - Independent deployment and scaling
- Alternative: Modular Monolith - Team autonomy without distributed complexity
Infrastructure Flexibility
- Primary: Hexagonal/Ports & Adapters - Swap infrastructure without domain changes
Simplicity & Maintainability
- Primary: Layered Architecture - Simple, well-understood separation
Real-time Event Processing
- Primary: Event-Driven Architecture - Scalable, decoupled processing
Step 3: Generate Implementation Roadmap (paradigms:roadmap-created)
Implementation Steps:
- Load the specific paradigm skill for detailed guidance
- Generate ADR template using the paradigm's templates
- Create migration checklist for existing systems
- Estimate effort and timeline based on team size and complexity
- Identify risks and mitigations specific to your context
Load paradigm skills for implementation:
architecture-paradigm-functional-core- Business logic isolationarchitecture-paradigm-hexagonal- Infrastructure independencearchitecture-paradigm-microservices- Independent servicesarchitecture-paradigm-event-driven- Event processingarchitecture-paradigm-layered- N-tier separationarchitecture-paradigm-cqrs-es- Command query separation with audit trailsarchitecture-paradigm-modular-monolith- Single deployable with strong boundariesarchitecture-paradigm-service-based- Coarse-grained services with shared databasearchitecture-paradigm-serverless- Stateless functions with minimal infrastructurearchitecture-paradigm-microkernel- Plugin architecture for extensible platformsarchitecture-paradigm-space-based- In-memory data grids for linear scalabilityarchitecture-paradigm-pipeline- Processing stages for ETL workflowsarchitecture-paradigm-client-server- Traditional client-server architectures
Paradigm Comparison Matrix
| Paradigm | Complexity | Team Size | Best For | Main Benefits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Core | Medium | Small-Large | Complex business logic | Testability, clarity |
| Hexagonal | Medium | Small-Large | Infrastructure changes | Flexibility, isolation |
| Layered | Low | Small-Medium | Simple domains | Simplicity, familiarity |
| Modular Monolith | Medium | Medium-Large | Evolving systems | Boundaries, single deploy |
| Microservices | High | Large | Complex domains | Autonomy, scaling |
| Event-Driven | High | Medium-Large | Real-time processing | Scalability, decoupling |
Future Tooling
Paradigm Selector Tool
# Interactive paradigm selection
paradigm-selector --interactive --team-size 5-15 --complexity moderate
# Compare specific paradigms
paradigm-selector --compare functional-core hexagonal --context current-project
# Get recommendations based on concerns
paradigm-selector --concerns testability,team-autonomy --scale medium
Implementation Planner Tool
# Generate a detailed roadmap
implementation-planner --paradigm hexagonal --project-size large --team-count 3
# Estimate effort and timeline
implementation-planner --paradigm microservices --complexity high --effort-estimate
# Risk assessment
implementation-planner --paradigm event-driven --context financial --risk-analysis
Compatibility Checker Tool
# Check paradigm combinations
compatibility-checker --paradigms functional-core,hexagonal --validate
# Migration path analysis
compatibility-checker --from layered --to hexagonal --migration-path
# Team readiness assessment
compatibility-checker --paradigm microservices --team-profile current-team
Integration with Other Skills
During Architecture Review
- Load this skill first to select paradigms.
- Then load
/architecture-reviewfor evaluation. - Use specific paradigm skills for implementation guidance.
During Implementation Planning
- Load this skill for paradigm selection and roadmap creation.
- Load
/writing-plansfor detailed task breakdown. - Use paradigm-specific skills for implementation checklists.
During Refactoring
- Load this skill to identify target paradigms.
- Load
systematic-debuggingfor a refactoring approach. - Use paradigm-specific skills for migration strategies.
Exit Criteria
- TodoWrite items are completed.
- At least one paradigm is selected with a clear rationale.
- An implementation roadmap has been generated.
- The specific paradigm skill has been loaded for detailed guidance.
- Follow-up ADR and documentation tasks have been identified.
Next Steps
- Load the specific paradigm skill for implementation guidance.
- Generate an ADR using the paradigm templates.
- Create an implementation plan with detailed tasks and timelines.
- Set up monitoring for the success metrics of the paradigm adoption.