본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

antipattern-detector

Detect common technical and organizational anti-patterns in proposals, architectures, and plans. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to identify red flags before they become problems.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md8.2 KB
  • antipattern-catalog.md12.2 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Anti-Pattern Detector

Identifies recurring failure patterns in technical decisions, organizational structures, and project plans.

When to Use

  • Reviewing architecture proposals
  • Evaluating project plans and roadmaps
  • Assessing team structures and processes
  • Validating technology choices
  • Checking migration strategies

Why Anti-Patterns Matter

Anti-patterns are proven failure modes. They look reasonable on the surface but lead to predictable problems:

  • Technical debt accumulation
  • Team burnout and turnover
  • Missed deadlines and budgets
  • System instability
  • Organizational dysfunction

Detecting them early saves months of pain.


Anti-Pattern Categories

1. Architecture Anti-Patterns

Structural problems in system design.

PatternDescriptionSymptoms
Big Ball of MudNo clear architecture, everything coupledCan't change X without breaking Y
Golden HammerUsing one tech for everything"We'll use Kubernetes for that too"
Premature MicroservicesSplitting before understanding boundaries3 devs managing 20 services
Distributed MonolithMicroservices with tight couplingDeploy all services together
Resume-Driven DevelopmentTech choices for career, not product"Let's use Rust for the admin panel"

2. Timeline Anti-Patterns

Planning failures that guarantee missed deadlines.

PatternDescriptionSymptoms
Timeline FantasyOptimistic estimates ignoring reality"6 weeks if everything goes well"
Scope Creep BlindnessNot accounting for inevitable additionsSame deadline, 2x features
Parallel Path DelusionAssuming unlimited parallelization"Add more devs to go faster"
MVP MaximalismMVP that's actually V347 features in "minimum" product
Demo-Driven DevelopmentBuilding for demos, not production"It works on my machine"

3. Team Anti-Patterns

Organizational structures that create dysfunction.

PatternDescriptionSymptoms
Hero CultureReliance on key individuals"Only Sarah can fix that"
Knowledge SilosCritical info in one person's headBus factor of 1
Conway's Law ViolationArchitecture doesn't match team structureTeam boundaries ≠ service boundaries
Understaffed AmbitionBig plans with tiny teams2 devs building "the platform"
Absent OwnershipNo clear owner for componentsBugs fall through cracks

4. Process Anti-Patterns

Workflow failures that slow delivery.

PatternDescriptionSymptoms
Cargo Cult AgileAgile ceremonies without principlesStandups but no shipping
Analysis ParalysisOver-planning, under-executingMonth 3 of "finalizing requirements"
Infinite RefactoringNever shipping, always "improving""One more cleanup before release"
Documentation TheaterDocs that no one reads or maintains200-page spec, outdated day 1
Meeting MadnessMore meetings than coding time"Let's schedule a meeting to discuss"

5. Technology Anti-Patterns

Poor technology decisions.

PatternDescriptionSymptoms
Shiny Object SyndromeChasing latest tech without reason"We should rewrite in [new thing]"
Not Invented HereBuilding what should be boughtCustom auth, custom logging, custom everything
Vendor Lock-in DenialIgnoring exit costs"We can always migrate later"
Premature OptimizationOptimizing before measuringCaching layer with 10 users
Framework OverloadToo many frameworks/libraries47 npm dependencies for a button

Detection Process

Step 1: Scan for Signals

Look for these phrases that often indicate anti-patterns:

Timeline signals:

  • "If everything goes well..."
  • "We can do it faster if we're focused..."
  • "Just need to hire..."
  • "Should only take..."

Architecture signals:

  • "We'll figure out the boundaries later..."
  • "Everything talks to everything..."
  • "It's only for now..."
  • "We can always refactor..."

Team signals:

  • "Only [person] knows..."
  • "We'll hire for that..."
  • "[Person] will handle all of..."
  • "The team can absorb..."

Process signals:

  • "We don't need docs for this..."
  • "We'll add tests later..."
  • "Let's discuss in the meeting..."
  • "Requirements are still evolving..."

Step 2: Verify Pattern Match

For each suspected anti-pattern:

  1. Identify the pattern: Which specific anti-pattern?
  2. Gather evidence: What in the proposal matches?
  3. Assess severity: How bad is it? (Critical/High/Medium/Low)
  4. Check context: Could this be a reasonable exception?

Step 3: Document Findings

### Anti-Pattern: [Name]

**Category**: Architecture / Timeline / Team / Process / Technology
**Severity**: Critical / High / Medium / Low

**Evidence**:
- [Quote or observation 1]
- [Quote or observation 2]

**Why This Is a Problem**:
[Explain the typical failure mode]

**Historical Examples**:
[Reference similar failures if known]

**Recommendation**:
[Specific action to address]

Severity Framework

Critical

Will cause project failure if not addressed.

  • Examples: No clear ownership, timeline fantasy for commitments, hero dependency
  • Action: Stop and address before proceeding

High

Will cause significant problems.

  • Examples: Premature microservices, understaffed plans, shiny object syndrome
  • Action: Address in planning phase

Medium

Will cause friction and delays.

  • Examples: Documentation gaps, process inefficiencies, minor scope creep
  • Action: Include in risk mitigation

Low

Worth noting but manageable.

  • Examples: Style inconsistencies, minor tech debt, preference-based choices
  • Action: Track and address opportunistically

Output Format

# Anti-Pattern Analysis: [Plan/Proposal Name]

## Summary
- **Patterns Detected**: [Count]
- **Critical Issues**: [Count]
- **Overall Risk Level**: Critical / High / Medium / Low

## Critical Issues (Must Address)

### 1. [Pattern Name]
**Category**: [Category]
**Evidence**: [What triggered this detection]
**Risk**: [What will go wrong]
**Fix**: [How to address]

---

## High-Priority Issues (Should Address)

### 2. [Pattern Name]
[Same format]

---

## Medium-Priority Issues (Consider Addressing)

### 3. [Pattern Name]
[Same format]

---

## Patterns NOT Detected
[List patterns that were checked but not found - provides confidence]

## Recommendations

### Before Proceeding
1. [Critical action 1]
2. [Critical action 2]

### During Execution
1. [Mitigation 1]
2. [Mitigation 2]

### Monitoring
- [Warning sign to watch for]
- [Metric to track]

Common Pattern Combinations

Certain anti-patterns tend to appear together:

The Startup Death Spiral

  • Timeline Fantasy + Understaffed Ambition + Hero Culture
  • Result: Burnout, missed deadlines, key person leaves

The Enterprise Trap

  • Analysis Paralysis + Documentation Theater + Meeting Madness
  • Result: Nothing ships, team frustrated, competition wins

The Tech Debt Avalanche

  • "We'll refactor later" + No clear ownership + Premature optimization
  • Result: System becomes unmaintainable, rewrite required

The Microservices Mistake

  • Premature Microservices + Distributed Monolith + Not enough DevOps
  • Result: Complexity explosion, slower delivery than monolith

Integration with Validation

The antipattern-detector feeds into the broader validation workflow:

Proposal/Plan
     │
     ▼
[assumption-challenger] → Assumptions identified
     │
     ▼
[antipattern-detector] → Patterns identified
     │
     ▼
[validation-report-generator] → Combined 8-section report

References

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Recommend architecture patterns (monolith, microservices, serverless, modular monolith) based on scale, team size, and constraints. Use when cto-architect needs to select the right architectural approach for a new system or migration.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

Identify and challenge implicit assumptions in plans, proposals, and technical decisions. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to surface hidden assumptions and wishful thinking before they become costly mistakes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

Generate targeted clarifying questions (2-3 max) that challenge vague requirements and extract missing context. Use after request-analyzer identifies clarification needs, before routing to specialist agents. Helps cto-orchestrator avoid delegating unclear requirements.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

Infrastructure and development cost estimation for technical projects. Use when planning budgets, evaluating build vs buy decisions, or projecting TCO for architecture choices.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

Transform clarified user requests into structured delegation prompts optimized for specialist agents (cto-architect, strategic-cto-mentor, cv-ml-architect). Use after clarification is complete, before routing to specialist agents. Ensures agents receive complete context for effective work.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

Deep expertise in ML/CV model selection, training pipelines, and inference architecture. Use when designing machine learning systems, computer vision pipelines, or AI-powered features.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1192025년 12월 18일 업데이트

alirezarezvani의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고