Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Define how system components connect, establishing boundaries, patterns, and integration approaches during PRD v0.6 Architecture. Triggers on requests to design architecture, create system design, define component relationships, or when user asks "design architecture", "system design", "how do components connect?", "architecture decisions", "technical architecture", "system overview". Consumes TECH- (stack selections), RISK- (constraints), FEA- (features). Outputs ARC- entries documenting architecture decisions with rationale. Feeds v0.6 Technical Specification.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name prd-v06-architecture-design
description Define how system components connect, establishing boundaries, patterns, and integration approaches during PRD v0.6 Architecture. Triggers on requests to design architecture, create system design, define component relationships, or when user asks "design architecture", "system design", "how do components connect?", "architecture decisions", "technical architecture", "system overview". Consumes TECH- (stack selections), RISK- (constraints), FEA- (features). Outputs ARC- entries documenting architecture decisions with rationale. Feeds v0.6 Technical Specification.

Architecture Design

Position in workflow: v0.5 Technical Stack Selection → v0.6 Architecture Design → v0.6 Technical Specification

Architecture defines how your system components connect. This skill transforms stack selections into a coherent system design with explicit boundaries and integration patterns.

Architecture Decision Categories

Category What It Covers Example Decisions
Structure Component organization, boundaries Monolith vs microservices, module structure
Integration External service connections API gateway pattern, webhook handlers
Security Auth, authorization, data protection JWT strategy, role-based access
Performance Scaling, caching, optimization CDN strategy, database indexing
Data Storage, flow, consistency Event sourcing, CQRS, replication
DevOps Deployment, monitoring, CI/CD Container orchestration, observability

Design Process

  1. Pull TECH- decisions — What technologies are we building with?
  2. Pull RISK- constraints — What must the architecture account for?
  3. Pull FEA- features — What must the system do?
  4. Define system boundaries — What's in/out of scope?
  5. Map component relationships — How do parts connect?
  6. Document integration patterns — How do Buy/Integrate items connect?
  7. Create ARC- entries — Record decisions with rationale

System Boundary Definition

Before designing components, define what's inside and outside your system:

Inside (Build):

  • Core business logic
  • Differentiating features
  • Custom workflows

Outside (Buy/Integrate):

  • Authentication provider
  • Payment processor
  • Email service
  • Analytics

Boundary Questions:

  • Where does data enter the system?
  • Where does data leave the system?
  • What trust boundaries exist?
  • What must be fast vs. can be eventual?

Component Relationship Patterns

For Build Components

Pattern When to Use Example
Monolith MVP, small team, unclear boundaries Single Next.js app
Modular Monolith Growing codebase, clear domains Modules with defined interfaces
Microservices Clear boundaries, scaling needs Separate auth, billing, core services

Rule for MVP: Start monolith, extract services when you have evidence of need.

For Buy/Integrate Components

Pattern When to Use Example
Direct Integration Simple, trusted service Call Stripe API directly
Adapter Layer Want to swap providers later Abstract over auth provider
Event Bridge Async, decoupled Webhooks → event queue → handlers

Integration Architecture Patterns

Pattern: Vendor Abstraction

When you Buy a service but want flexibility to switch:

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│           Your Application          │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│       Payment Abstraction Layer     │
│   interface PaymentProvider {       │
│     charge(amount, token): Result   │
│   }                                 │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  StripeAdapter  │  PaddleAdapter    │
└─────────────────┴───────────────────┘

When to use: High switching cost, multiple viable providers, strategic flexibility needed.

Pattern: Webhook Handler

When integrating with external events:

External Service → Webhook Endpoint → Event Queue → Handler
                        ↓
                   Signature Verify
                        ↓
                   Idempotency Check
                        ↓
                   Enqueue for processing

When to use: External services push events (Stripe, GitHub, etc.).

ARC- Output Template

ARC-XXX: [Decision Title]
Category: [Structure | Integration | Security | Performance | Data | DevOps]
Context: [What prompted this decision]
Decision: [What we decided]
Rationale: [Why this choice]

Alternatives Rejected:
  - [Option A]: [Why not]
  - [Option B]: [Why not]

Consequences:
  - Enables: [What this makes possible]
  - Constrains: [What this limits]

Related IDs: [TECH-XXX, RISK-XXX, FEA-XXX]
Status: [Proposed | Accepted | Superseded]

Example ARC- entry:

ARC-001: Monolith with Module Boundaries
Category: Structure
Context: Need to choose application structure for MVP launch
Decision: Single Next.js application with domain-based module folders

Rationale:
  - Team of 2 developers, single deployment simplifies ops
  - Unclear domain boundaries at this stage
  - Can extract services later when patterns emerge

Alternatives Rejected:
  - Microservices: Premature; adds ops complexity without proven need
  - Serverless functions: Harder to share code, cold start concerns

Consequences:
  - Enables: Fast iteration, simple deployment, shared state
  - Constrains: Single scaling unit, must be disciplined about module boundaries

Related IDs: TECH-001 (Next.js), RISK-005 (scaling concerns)
Status: Accepted

Example ARC- entry (Security):

ARC-005: JWT with HTTP-Only Cookies
Category: Security
Context: Need session management strategy for authenticated users
Decision: JWTs stored in HTTP-only cookies, 1-hour expiry, refresh via /refresh endpoint

Rationale:
  - HTTP-only prevents XSS access to tokens
  - Short expiry limits damage from stolen tokens
  - Refresh flow handles long sessions gracefully

Alternatives Rejected:
  - localStorage: Vulnerable to XSS
  - Long-lived tokens: Security risk if compromised
  - Server-side sessions: Scaling complexity, Redis dependency

Consequences:
  - Enables: Stateless auth, horizontal scaling
  - Constrains: Must handle refresh flow in frontend, logout requires invalidation strategy

Related IDs: TECH-001 (Clerk handles this), RISK-008 (security compliance)
Status: Accepted

System Diagram Elements

When creating architecture diagrams, include:

Element Symbol Purpose
Service/Component Box Internal services, modules
External System Cloud/cylinder Third-party services, DBs
Trust Boundary Dashed line Security perimeters
Data Flow Arrow How data moves
Integration Point Diamond Where systems connect

Example Diagram Structure

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    TRUST BOUNDARY                        │
│  ┌─────────────┐     ┌─────────────┐    ┌────────────┐  │
│  │   Frontend  │────▶│   API       │───▶│  Database  │  │
│  │   (Next.js) │     │  (tRPC)     │    │  (Supabase)│  │
│  └─────────────┘     └──────┬──────┘    └────────────┘  │
│                             │                            │
└─────────────────────────────┼────────────────────────────┘
                              │
              ┌───────────────┼───────────────┐
              ▼               ▼               ▼
        ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐
        │  Stripe  │   │  Clerk   │   │  Resend  │
        │ (payments)│  │  (auth)  │   │ (email)  │
        └──────────┘   └──────────┘   └──────────┘
                    EXTERNAL SERVICES

RISK- to Architecture Mapping

Every high-priority risk should have an architectural response:

Risk Architecture Response
RISK-001: API dependency outage ARC-010: Add retry + circuit breaker
RISK-003: Data breach ARC-005: Encryption at rest + transit
RISK-007: Scaling bottleneck ARC-012: Cache layer, read replicas

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Anti-Pattern Signal Fix
Architecture astronaut Over-engineering for 1000x scale Design for 10x current needs
Missing boundaries Everything can call everything Define clear interfaces
Ignoring RISK- Architecture doesn't address risks Map each High RISK- to ARC-
Vendor lock-in No abstraction over critical services Add adapter layer for switching
Diagram without decisions Pretty pictures, no ARC- records Every box needs documented rationale
Premature microservices 5 services for MVP Start monolith, extract later

Quality Gates

Before proceeding to Technical Specification:

  • All TECH- Build items have component placement
  • All TECH- Buy/Integrate items have integration pattern
  • High-priority RISK- entries have architectural mitigation
  • Trust boundaries clearly defined
  • Data flow documented
  • ARC- entries created for major decisions

Downstream Connections

ARC- entries feed into:

Consumer What It Uses Example
Technical Specification ARC- informs API design ARC-001 (monolith) → unified API surface
v0.7 Build Execution ARC- defines EPIC scope ARC-003 (auth module) → EPIC-02
Infrastructure Setup ARC- drives deployment ARC-010 (edge caching) → CDN config
Security Review Security ARC- entries ARC-005 → pen test scope

Detailed References

  • Architecture pattern examples: See references/examples.md
  • ARC- entry template: See assets/arc.md
  • Diagram templates: See references/diagrams.md