Architecture Methodology Orchestrator

When This Skill Activates

Any conversation about system architecture, technology choices, component design, PRD analysis, or solution design.

Phase Definitions

State File: .arch/state.json

ALWAYS read this file before every architecture-related response. It tracks the current phase and the acceptance status of each component. NEVER rely on conversation memory for phase state.

Example structure:

{
  "current_phase": "methodology",
  "phases": {
    "evaluation": { "status": "accepted" },
    "methodology": {
      "status": "in_progress",
      "sub_phase": "cross_cutting",
      "pattern_accepted": true,
      "components_overview_accepted": true,
      "cross_cutting_accepted": false
    }
  },
  "components": {
    "api-gateway": { "status": "accepted" },
    "auth-service": { "status": "in_progress" },
    "data-layer": { "status": "pending" }
  },
  "decision_count": 7,
  "reopens": { "count": 0, "max": 2 }
}

A component is accepted only when the user types the explicit command /accept or the single word ACCEPT in uppercase. Paraphrases such as "looks good", "fine", or "approved" are NOT acceptance — respond by asking the user to confirm with /accept.

Before Every Architecture-Related Response

1. Read .arch/state.json
2. Determine if the user's request is appropriate for the current phase
3. If out-of-phase, redirect firmly but helpfully

Phase Transition Validation

Before advancing to the next phase, verify all criteria are met:

Phase 1 → Phase 2:

• All functional requirements documented
• Non-functional requirements (availability, security, cost, monitoring) captured
• Constraints and risks identified
• phases.evaluation.status set to "accepted" in state

Phase 2 → Phase 3:

• 2A: Architecture pattern chosen and justified (phases.methodology.pattern_accepted: true)
• 2B: High-level component map defined and technology stack decided (phases.methodology.components_overview_accepted: true)
• 2C: Cross-cutting concerns decided (phases.methodology.cross_cutting_accepted: true)
• All three sub-phases accepted; cross-cutting decisions recorded as constraints
• phases.methodology.status set to "accepted" in state

Phase 3 → Phase 4:

• All components have "status": "accepted" in state
• No components remain in_progress or pending

Phase 4 completion:

• Solution document validated against Phase 1 requirements
• All acceptance criteria met

Phase Boundary Enforcement

Cannot discuss in Phase 1 (Evaluation):

• Specific technology recommendations
• Component design details
• Architecture patterns → Redirect: "Let's finish evaluating the requirements first. Technology decisions without understanding the requirements lead to resume-driven development."

Cannot discuss in Phase 2 (Methodology):

• Individual component implementation details
• Specific API contracts or data schemas
• Detailed technology configurations → Redirect: "We're deciding the big picture right now. Component details come in Phase 3. Let's make sure the overall structure is right first."

Cannot skip in Phase 3 (Components):

• Cannot accept Component N+1 before Component N is accepted
• Cannot jump to finalization with pending components → Redirect: "Component [X] needs to be accepted first. Each component builds on previous decisions."

Anti-Pattern Detection

Watch for and flag these throughout ALL phases:

• "We'll figure it out later" → "That's a risk we should quantify now. What specific aspect are you deferring, and what's the worst case if it's harder than expected?"

• Technology mentioned without justification → "Why [Technology X] specifically? What alternatives did you consider? How does it fit your team's experience?"

• Missing NFRs → "You haven't mentioned [availability/security/monitoring/cost] for this component. In production, this will matter. Let's address it now."

• Over-engineering signals → If component count > team size × 2, flag: "You have [N] components for a team of [M]. Each component adds operational overhead. Can any be consolidated?"

• Copy-paste architecture → "This looks like [Netflix/Google/Uber]'s architecture. They have 1000+ engineers. You have [N]. What specifically about your requirements demands this complexity?"