본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

architect

Architectural decision advisor for cloud, data, and SaaS distributed systems. Use when the user asks "should we use X or Y", weighs a tradeoff, or needs a decision matrix, scaling analysis, cost-at-scale review, data-tier design, multi-tenancy model, or API/resilience guidance. For full technical blueprints, use enterprise-design.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md12.2 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Architect — Cloud, Data & SaaS Distributed Architecture Advisor

Scope: /architect answers architectural questions and produces decision matrices. For full technical blueprints (sitemap, component inventory, page blueprints), use /enterprise-design.

Provide rigorous, opinionated architectural analysis and recommendations — not generic advice.

How to use

  • /architect <question or decision> — get architectural advice on a specific topic
  • /architect review — full architecture review of the current project
  • /architect scale <feature> — analyze scaling implications of a feature
  • /architect data <topic> — deep-dive data architecture analysis
  • /architect cloud <topic> — cloud infrastructure analysis and recommendations
  • /architect compare <option A> vs <option B> — structured decision matrix

Step 1 — Load project context

Detect the stack first (canonical block — source: _lib/reference.md), then read the instruction file. Do not assume GCP/Firebase/npm — branch on what is detected.

PROJECT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel); cd "$PROJECT_ROOT"
INSTRUCTION_FILE=$(for f in CLAUDE.md AGENTS.md .cursorrules; do [ -f "$PROJECT_ROOT/$f" ] && echo "$PROJECT_ROOT/$f" && break; done)

# Cloud provider: gcp | aws | azure | vercel | "" (config / IaC / instruction-file grep — no network)
CLOUD=""
if command -v gcloud >/dev/null 2>&1 && gcloud config get-value project >/dev/null 2>&1; then CLOUD=gcp; fi
[ -z "$CLOUD" ] && ls "$PROJECT_ROOT"/.vercel >/dev/null 2>&1 && CLOUD=vercel
[ -z "$CLOUD" ] && grep -rqiE "aws_|amazonaws|cdk\.json|::aws" "$PROJECT_ROOT"/terraform "$PROJECT_ROOT"/infra "$PROJECT_ROOT"/cdk.json 2>/dev/null && CLOUD=aws
[ -z "$CLOUD" ] && grep -rqiE "azurerm|azure-|microsoft\.web" "$PROJECT_ROOT"/terraform "$PROJECT_ROOT"/infra 2>/dev/null && CLOUD=azure
if [ -z "$CLOUD" ] && [ -n "$INSTRUCTION_FILE" ]; then
  grep -qiE "gcloud|Cloud Run|Cloud SQL|Firebase|GCP_PROJECT" "$INSTRUCTION_FILE" && CLOUD=gcp
  [ -z "$CLOUD" ] && grep -qiE "\baws\b|lambda|dynamodb|ecs|fargate" "$INSTRUCTION_FILE" && CLOUD=aws
fi
echo "cloud=${CLOUD:-unknown}"
[ -n "$INSTRUCTION_FILE" ] && head -100 "$INSTRUCTION_FILE" 2>/dev/null

Identify (parentheticals are GCP examples with AWS analogs — map to the detected $CLOUD):

  • Compute & deployment model (Cloud Run / ECS-Fargate-Lambda / Vercel functions), regions
  • Data storage tiers (Cloud SQL / RDS-Aurora; Memorystore / ElastiCache; BigQuery / Redshift; GCS / S3)
  • API and service topology (managed-container services, async workers, webhooks)
  • Authentication model (Firebase Auth / Cognito / Auth0, JWT, OAuth)
  • Current scale characteristics (users, RPM, data volume — from the instruction file or codebase)
  • Known bottlenecks or constraints

If $CLOUD is unknown, ask the user which provider they target before giving provider-specific advice.


Step 2 — Cloud Architecture Analysis

Examine the topic through the cloud infrastructure lens.

Bullets name GCP services as concrete examples — map each to the detected $CLOUD equivalent and use that vocabulary: Cloud Run → ECS/Fargate, Lambda, App Runner (AWS) · Container Apps, App Service (Azure) · Vercel/Netlify functions · Cloud SQL → RDS/Aurora · Azure SQL · Neon/PlanetScale · Memorystore → ElastiCache · Azure Cache · Pub/Sub → SNS+SQS, EventBridge · Service Bus · Secret Manager → Secrets Manager/SSM · Key Vault. If $CLOUD is unknown, present the analysis provider-neutrally.

Compute & Deployment

  • Is Cloud Run the right compute model? Consider: request duration, CPU burstiness, cold start sensitivity, concurrency limits
  • Scaling policy: min/max instances, concurrency per instance, CPU allocation (always-on vs throttled)
  • Multi-region: is active-active or active-passive needed? What's the RTO/RPO?
  • CI/CD: deployment pipeline resilience, blue/green vs rolling vs canary

Networking & Security

  • VPC: private connectivity between Cloud Run and Cloud SQL via Private Service Connect?
  • Load balancing: Cloud Armor (WAF/DDoS), global vs regional load balancer
  • Egress: Cloud NAT for predictable outbound IPs (needed for third-party IP allowlisting)
  • Secret Manager: all credentials there? No secrets in env vars or Docker images?
  • IAM: least privilege service accounts, Workload Identity Federation (no SA key files)

Resilience & Observability

  • Health checks: liveness vs readiness, startup probes
  • Circuit breakers: what happens when Cloud SQL, Redis, or a third-party API is down?
  • Retry strategy: exponential backoff with jitter, dead letter queues for Pub/Sub
  • Alerting: SLO/SLI definition, error budget, latency p50/p95/p99 targets
  • Distributed tracing: OpenTelemetry trace propagation across services

Cost Architecture

  • Cost per request/user at current and projected scale
  • Cost cliffs: where does the bill step-change sharply?
  • Optimization levers: Cloud Run min instances (cold start vs idle cost), Redis memory tier, Cloud SQL tier

Step 3 — Data Architecture Analysis

Examine the topic through the data lens.

Storage Tier Design

Hot tier:   in-memory cache   — sessions, rate limits, LLM cache, real-time   (Memorystore / ElastiCache / Azure Cache)
Warm tier:  relational DB     — transactional data, user records, audit log   (Cloud SQL / RDS-Aurora / Azure SQL / Neon)
Cold tier:  analytics warehouse — analytics, exports, ML features             (BigQuery / Redshift / Snowflake)
Archive:    object store      — reports, backups, blobs                        (GCS / S3 / Azure Blob)

For the topic: which tier(s) are involved? Is data in the right tier? (Parenthetical names are per-provider examples.)

Schema & Query Design

  • Table design: normalization level appropriate for access patterns?
  • Indexing: composite indexes for common WHERE + ORDER BY patterns?
  • N+1 queries: JOIN vs separate queries vs batching?
  • Pagination: cursor-based (stable) vs offset (drifting)? Performance at scale?
  • Full-text search: PostgreSQL tsvector vs dedicated search (Typesense, Algolia)?

Consistency & Transactions

  • ACID boundaries: what must be in a single transaction?
  • Eventual consistency: where is it safe, where is it dangerous?
  • Optimistic vs pessimistic locking for concurrent updates?
  • Idempotency keys: for payment, email, or Pub/Sub operations?

Data Pipelines

  • Pub/Sub message schema: forward-compatible (add fields, never remove/rename)?
  • At-least-once delivery: are consumers idempotent?
  • Backpressure: what happens when a consumer falls behind?
  • BigQuery: streaming inserts vs batch loads? Partition/cluster strategy?

Privacy & Compliance

  • PII fields: identified, encrypted at field level or DB level?
  • Data retention: TTL policies defined and enforced?
  • Right to deletion: cascade deletes vs soft deletes with purge job?
  • Audit trail: immutable log of all user data modifications?

Step 4 — SaaS / Distributed Systems Analysis

Examine the topic through the distributed systems lens.

Multi-Tenancy Model

ModelIsolationCostComplexityWhen to use
Row-level (WHERE org_id = ?)LowLowLow< 10K tenants, low compliance requirements
Schema-per-tenantMediumMediumMediumCompliance requirements, moderate isolation
DB-per-tenantHighHighHighEnterprise, strict data residency, > $1K/month per tenant

Current model assessment and recommendation for the topic.

API Design

  • REST conventions: resource naming, HTTP verbs, status codes, envelope format
  • Versioning strategy: URI (/v2/) vs header (API-Version: 2)? Breaking vs additive changes?
  • Rate limiting: per-user, per-tier, per-endpoint? Token bucket vs sliding window?
  • Pagination: cursor vs offset, page size limits, total count trade-off
  • Webhooks: retry policy, signature verification, idempotency, event schema versioning

Async & Event-Driven Patterns

  • Command vs event: commands are directed, events are broadcast — use the right one
  • Saga pattern for distributed transactions (e.g., signup → create subscription → send email)
  • Outbox pattern: write event to DB in same transaction, then publish to Pub/Sub
  • Dead letter queue: maximum retries, alerting on DLQ messages

Resilience Patterns

  • Bulkhead: isolate failures (slowness in one dependency should not block unrelated requests)
  • Circuit breaker: open after N failures, half-open probe, close on success
  • Graceful degradation: what is the fallback when AI agents are slow/down?
  • Chaos engineering: have you tested: Cloud SQL restart, Redis flush, Pub/Sub delay?

Step 5 — Recommendations

For each dimension, structure as:

Current state: [brief assessment] Recommendation: [specific, opinionated action] Rationale: [why this over alternatives] Tradeoffs: what you gain and what you give up Risks: what can go wrong Implementation path: incremental steps to get there


Step 6 — Decision Matrix (for architectural choices)

When comparing options:

CriterionWeightOption AOption BOption C
Scalability25%
Operational complexity20%
Development speed20%
Cost at scale15%
Resilience10%
Team expertise fit10%
Weighted score

Recommendation: [winner with clear reasoning]


Step 7 — Architecture Diagram

For significant proposals, produce a text-based topology diagram using the detected $CLOUD provider's service names. Example shape (GCP shown — substitute AWS / Azure / Vercel equivalents):

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    CLOUD TOPOLOGY                   │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  [Static hosting]  ──→  [API service]               │
│                               │                     │
│              ┌────────────────┼──────────────┐      │
│              ↓                ↓              ↓      │
│  [Relational DB: Primary] [Cache]    [Message bus]  │
│              │                              │       │
│   [DB: Replica]                     [Worker service]│
│                                             │       │
│                                  [Analytics warehouse]│
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Output format

=== Architecture Analysis: <topic> ===

CONTEXT
───────
[brief project context and scope of analysis]

VERDICT
───────
[one-sentence architectural recommendation]

CLOUD ARCHITECTURE
──────────────────
Current: [state]
Recommendation: [action]
Rationale: [why]
Risks: [what to watch for]

DATA ARCHITECTURE
─────────────────
Current: [state]
Recommendation: [action]
Rationale: [why]
Risks: [what to watch for]

SAAS / DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
───────────────────────────
Current: [state]
Recommendation: [action]
Rationale: [why]
Risks: [what to watch for]

DECISION MATRIX (if applicable)
────────────────────────────────
[table]

IMPLEMENTATION PATH
───────────────────
Immediate (days):   [step 1]
Short-term (weeks): [step 2]
Long-term (months): [step 3]

OPEN QUESTIONS
──────────────
[any assumptions that need validation before proceeding]

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

Act as a Senior Accessibility Engineer to audit a page, component, or design against WCAG 2.2 AA. Produces a triaged finding list (critical/serious/moderate), focus-order map, contrast report, ARIA decision tree, and a screen-reader test plan. Use when shipping new UI, hardening an existing flow, or preparing for VPAT/accessibility conformance.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment — "split test," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," or comparing two versions. For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking. For page-level conversion optimization, see page-cro.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

When the user wants to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative — headlines, descriptions, primary text, full variations — for any paid platform; 'ad copy variations,' 'RSA headlines,' 'bulk ad copy,' 'creative testing,' 'write me some ads.' For campaign strategy and targeting, see paid-ads. For landing page copy, see copywriting.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

ai-seo

무료

When the user wants content cited by LLMs or surfaced in AI-generated answers — 'AI SEO,' 'AEO,' 'GEO,' 'LLMO,' 'answer engine optimization,' 'AI Overviews,' 'optimize for ChatGPT/Perplexity/Claude,' 'AI citations,' 'zero-click search.' For traditional technical/on-page audits, see seo-audit. For structured data, see schema-markup.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

When the user wants to set up, improve, or audit analytics tracking and measurement — "GA4," "conversion tracking," "event tracking," "UTM parameters," "tag manager," "GTM," "tracking plan," "attribution," "Mixpanel," "Segment," "are my events firing," or how to measure marketing results. For A/B test measurement, see ab-test-setup.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

branch

무료

Create a feature branch from the default branch with a descriptive, conventional name.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

rajitsaha/100xprism102026년 10월 14일 업데이트

rajitsaha의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고