Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

anth-reference-architecture

Choose and plan a Claude API architecture for interactive requests, background jobs, or model routing. The skill lays out service components, failure handling, and safeguards so a team can test a selected pattern before production use.

OriginalShow the original description

Implement Claude API reference architectures for common use cases. Use when designing a Claude-powered application, choosing between direct API vs queue-based, or planning a multi-model architecture. Trigger with phrases like "anthropic architecture", "claude system design", "anthropic reference architecture", "design claude integration".

Works withRedis

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Choosing sync or queued Claude API calls
  • Planning background batch processing
  • Routing requests across Claude models
  • Designing failure handling for Claude integrations

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md7.2 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Anthropic Reference Architecture

Overview

Three validated architecture patterns for Claude API integrations: synchronous API gateway, async queue-based processing, and multi-model routing.

Architecture 1: Sync API Gateway (Simple)

User → API Gateway → Claude Service → Messages API
                                     ↓
                                   Response → User
# Best for: chatbots, interactive tools, low-volume (<100 RPM)
from fastapi import FastAPI
import anthropic

app = FastAPI()
client = anthropic.Anthropic(max_retries=3, timeout=60.0)

@app.post("/chat")
async def chat(prompt: str):
    msg = client.messages.create(
        model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
        max_tokens=1024,
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}]
    )
    return {"text": msg.content[0].text, "tokens": msg.usage.output_tokens}

Architecture 2: Async Queue-Based (Scalable)

User → API → Queue (Redis/SQS) → Worker Pool → Messages API
  ↑                                                ↓
  └──────────── Status/Result ←── Result Store ←───┘
# Best for: batch processing, high-volume, background tasks
from redis import Redis
from rq import Queue
import anthropic

redis = Redis()
task_queue = Queue("claude-tasks", connection=redis)
result_store = Redis(db=1)

def process_task(task_id: str, prompt: str, model: str):
    client = anthropic.Anthropic()
    msg = client.messages.create(
        model=model,
        max_tokens=1024,
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}]
    )
    result_store.setex(f"result:{task_id}", 3600, msg.content[0].text)

# Enqueue
import uuid
task_id = str(uuid.uuid4())
task_queue.enqueue(process_task, task_id, prompt, "claude-sonnet-4-20250514")

Architecture 3: Multi-Model Router

User → Router → Haiku    (classify/extract)
              → Sonnet   (general/code)
              → Opus     (research/complex)
              → Batches  (bulk/offline)
class ModelRouter:
    def __init__(self):
        self.client = anthropic.Anthropic()
        self.classifier = anthropic.Anthropic()  # Can be same client

    def route_and_execute(self, prompt: str, context: dict) -> str:
        # Step 1: Classify with Haiku (cheap, fast)
        classification = self.classifier.messages.create(
            model="claude-haiku-4-20250514",
            max_tokens=32,
            messages=[{
                "role": "user",
                "content": f"Classify this request as: simple|moderate|complex|bulk\n\n{prompt[:200]}"
            }]
        )
        complexity = classification.content[0].text.strip().lower()

        # Step 2: Route to appropriate model
        model_map = {
            "simple": "claude-haiku-4-20250514",
            "moderate": "claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
            "complex": "claude-opus-4-20250514",
        }
        model = model_map.get(complexity, "claude-sonnet-4-20250514")

        # Step 3: Execute with selected model
        msg = self.client.messages.create(
            model=model,
            max_tokens=4096,
            messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}]
        )
        return msg.content[0].text

Project Layout

my-claude-app/
├── src/
│   ├── main.py              # FastAPI app
│   ├── claude/
│   │   ├── client.py         # Singleton + config
│   │   ├── router.py         # Model routing logic
│   │   ├── tools.py          # Tool definitions
│   │   └── prompts/          # System prompts as files
│   ├── workers/
│   │   └── claude_worker.py  # Queue consumer
│   └── middleware/
│       ├── rate_limiter.py   # App-level rate limiting
│       └── cost_tracker.py   # Spend monitoring
├── tests/
│   ├── unit/                 # Mocked tests
│   └── integration/          # Live API tests
└── config/
    ├── .env.development
    ├── .env.staging
    └── .env.production

Error Handling

ArchitectureFailure ModeMitigation
Sync Gateway429/5xx blocks userCircuit breaker + fallback response
Queue-BasedWorker crashesDead-letter queue + retry policy
Multi-ModelRouter misclassifiesDefault to Sonnet (safest middle)

Prerequisites

  • Choose the workload class, availability/latency SLOs, data classification, approved destinations, and synchronous versus asynchronous behavior with an owner.
  • Provide an isolated workspace, least-privileged secret-manager credential, synthetic fixtures, bounded queue/concurrency settings, and a tested rollback/circuit-breaker plan.
  • Define idempotency, retention, dead-letter, and redacted evidence requirements before selecting an architecture.

Instructions

  1. Select the smallest architecture that meets the workload: gateway for interactive calls, queue for asynchronous work, or a router only when model policy and quality tests justify it.
  2. Keep credentials and policy enforcement at the service boundary. Validate model, token, rate, data-class, source, and destination scope before enqueueing or sending a request.
  3. Exercise success, timeout, 429/5xx, duplicate, queue-retry, tool-use, and partial-response paths with synthetic fixtures. Ensure traces and result stores exclude prompts, responses, and secrets.
  4. Canary the selected topology in an isolated workspace, observe SLOs/cost/rate limits, and require approval before production traffic. Preserve the prior topology and configuration.
  5. On policy, reliability, or cost regression, open the circuit or pause workers, drain/quarantine unsafe work, roll back, and retain a redacted architecture receipt.

Output

Produce an architecture receipt naming the selected pattern, component/config digests, workspace and model classes, scope/idempotency/retention controls, synthetic test results, canary and SLO outcomes, approval, and rollback reference. Exclude request content, user identifiers, credentials, and raw queue payloads.

Examples

For 100 synthetic asynchronous classification jobs, use a sandbox queue with a bounded worker pool, assert duplicate_jobs=0; contacts_exported=0; content_logged=0, and canary one internal consumer. A queue failure yields paused=true; dead_letter=synthetic-only; rollback=worker-v1.

Resources

Next Steps

For multi-environment setup, see anth-multi-env-setup.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Add a synthetic-data CI gate for customer-owned Abridge integration code. Test consent handling, note-review handoffs, redaction, and rollback behavior with mocked vendor boundaries, without connecting CI to a live Abridge or EHR tenant.

  • Adding regression checks to an Abridge integration repository
  • Testing consent and note-release handling
  • Checking logs for sensitive data exposure
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

Triage Abridge recording, note review, Epic handoff, and access problems using observed symptoms and approved guidance. Identify the affected workflow stage, organize a minimal timeline, and prepare a redacted escalation record for the responsible team.

  • Separate recording problems from upload failures
  • Investigate note creation delays and editor issues
  • Identify the responsible team for Epic handoff failures
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

Map and review an Abridge clinical documentation workflow from consent and recording through draft review, evidence checks, edits, and final disposition. Keep clinician approval explicit, identify failure exits, and separate verified facts from tenant-specific details and pending approvals.

  • Map a clinical note workflow for a care setting
  • Check where consent and patient identity are verified
  • Review draft notes against linked evidence before sign-off
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

Audit how clinician-reviewed Abridge note sections map into Epic templates and downstream workflows. Use approved test records to document destinations, exceptions, evidence, rollback steps, and a go or no-go decision for a specific environment.

  • Checking Abridge note section mappings to Epic templates
  • Auditing a department’s approved documentation handoff
  • Preparing test evidence and a go or no-go decision
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

Review Abridge adoption and workflow value using local usage records, clinician feedback, and verified contract costs. Build an evidence based decision table covering adoption, quality, support burden, and options to expand, hold, or improve the rollout.

  • Reviewing adoption after an Abridge rollout
  • Preparing evidence for a renewal decision
  • Comparing workflow outcomes across care settings
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

Prepare a bounded support bundle for an Abridge issue using allowlisted operational details such as versions, coarse timestamps, and correlation references. Exclude recordings, transcripts, patient identifiers, credentials, and unrestricted logs, then document redactions and review details.

  • Preparing reviewed evidence for an Abridge support case
  • Documenting redactions and excluded data
  • Collecting approved operational details for an incident
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 25, 2026

See all skills by jeremylongshore

Report a problem with this skill