本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

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.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

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

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

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

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team1172025年12月18日 更新

alirezarezvani のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する