emerge/architecture-patterns
Knowledge base for architecture patterns, trade-offs, and selection criteria. Activates when recommending or evaluating architecture patterns like microservices, monolith, serverless, event-driven, CQRS, or hybrid approaches.
88
82%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
99%
1.12xAverage score across 5 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Evaluation results
100%
4%Architecture Recommendation for a B2B Project Tracking Startup
Team Fit Criteria Application
Recommends monolith or modular monolith
100%
100%
No microservices recommendation
100%
100%
No Kubernetes recommendation
100%
100%
Team size cited
100%
100%
No DevOps cited
100%
100%
Junior/mid experience cited
100%
100%
Low operational complexity
100%
100%
Pattern risks stated
50%
100%
100%
7%Architecture Recommendation for an IoT Sensor Data Platform
Operational Reality Constraint Elimination
Max 3 independent services
100%
100%
No polyglot persistence
53%
100%
Single DevOps constraint cited
100%
100%
No DBA constraint cited
100%
100%
Monitoring maturity cited
100%
100%
Observability emphasis
100%
100%
Serverless for spiky load
100%
100%
Budget constraint cited
100%
100%
100%
18%Architecture Recommendation for an Online Learning Platform
Requirement Signal Pattern Matching
CQRS for read/write asymmetry
13%
100%
Strong consistency solution
100%
100%
Event-driven for notifications
100%
100%
Regulatory service isolation
100%
100%
Read/write asymmetry cited
50%
100%
Consistency requirement cited
100%
100%
Compliance requirement cited
100%
100%
No CQRS for simple subsystems
100%
100%
Requirement signals are the basis
100%
100%
100%
Review a Proposed Architecture for a Food Delivery Startup
Red Flag Detection
Distributed monolith flag
100%
100%
Event sourcing data loss flag
100%
100%
Serverless wrong pattern flag
100%
100%
CQRS over-engineering flag
100%
100%
Does not approve uncritically
100%
100%
96%
23%Architecture Recommendation for a Fintech Fraud Detection Platform
Full Workflow and Recommendation Output Format
Pattern named explicitly
100%
100%
Why it fits explained
100%
100%
Top risks stated
33%
75%
Migration trigger provided
16%
100%
Team context addressed
100%
100%
Operational constraints addressed
100%
100%
Requirement signals addressed
100%
100%
Red flags checked
10%
90%
Single concrete recommendation
100%
100%
- Evaluated
- Agent
- Claude Code
- Model
- Claude Sonnet 4.6
Table of Contents