agentleFS
jMertajMerta/codex-skills/review-architecture-scope/SKILL.md

review-architecture-scope

Skill130 starsChanged 11 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when the user asks for a pre-PR or diff review of changes crossing application, API contract, runtime, tenant, deployment, infrastructure, observability, or intended-outcome boundaries. Traces producers, consumers, compatibility windows, asynchronous context, rollout paths, and scope without treating diff size as risk.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Read repository instructions for every changed surface.

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    Use evidence in this order: changed code and complete call chain, behavior-protecting tests, repository instructions, then other …

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Search symbols and wire names to find actual producers and consumers.

    line 25
  4. Distinctive:

    Add fields before requiring them, tolerate absence during the compatibility window, and remove old fields only after consumers and cached …

    line 27
  5. Distinctive:

    Verify executable bits, interpreter and shell selection, line endings, environment behavior, and failure handling when scripts change.

    line 34
  6. Distinctive:

    Read references/casebook.md when the diff crosses contracts, runtimes, async execution, infrastructure, deployment, or observability.

    line 47
  7. Very specific:

    Use blocked only when the diff or a critical contract cannot be evaluated.

    line 56

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Architecture and Scope Review

Review only unless the user separately authorizes fixes. Do not post comments or change pull-request state.

Review contract

  1. Establish the base, changed files, intended outcome, and rollout unit. Infer missing scope from the diff and nearby code before asking.
  2. Read repository instructions for every changed surface.
  3. Trace each changed contract to its producer, actual consumers, runtime and deployment configuration, and nearest tests.
  4. Compare behavior before and after. Exclude untouched debt, style preferences, and hypothetical failures.
  5. Report only a reachable failure introduced, worsened, or materially touched at a changed location with confidence of at least 80/100.
  6. Give mechanism, evidence, smallest safe direction, and exact validation.

Use evidence in this order: changed code and complete call chain, behavior-protecting tests, repository instructions, then other documentation. Report instruction drift separately instead of inventing a diff finding.

Inspection map

Contracts and rollout

  • Search symbols and wire names to find actual producers and consumers; do not assume every application uses the contract.
  • For independently deployed versions, model old producer/new consumer and new producer/old consumer.
  • Add fields before requiring them, tolerate absence during the compatibility window, and remove old fields only after consumers and cached or public surfaces have moved.
  • Separate transport compatibility from app-specific view models.

Runtime and asynchronous seams

  • For framework, runtime, package-manager, build-tool, or major dependency changes, inspect configuration, build and runtime images, CI commands, entry points, and an already migrated surface when available.
  • Scheduled, queued, retried, event-driven, and outbox work has no request guarantee. Carry durable identity and tenant context explicitly rather than resolving it from request state.
  • Verify executable bits, interpreter and shell selection, line endings, environment behavior, and failure handling when scripts change.

Infrastructure and observability

  • Render every environment affected by shared manifests or templates.
  • Trace candidate rollout, health checks, traffic promotion, failure traps, rollback, and ready-replica restoration.
  • Validate dashboards on empty, excluded, mixed, and boundary windows. Preserve driving rows through outer joins and quote variables according to the datasource.
  • Judge access through the complete authentication, authorization, provisioning, and datasource chain.

Scope

Judge scope against the intended outcome and owning boundary, not line count. Compatibility changes, tests, generated artifacts, and safe rollout work may be required. Adjacent product behavior and unrelated abstractions are out of scope unless they create a concrete changed failure.

Read references/casebook.md when the diff crosses contracts, runtimes, async execution, infrastructure, deployment, or observability.

Findings

  • P0: credible tenant, authorization, payment, secret, personal-data, or permanent data-loss path.
  • P1: user- or operations-visible contract, runtime, rollout, or integrity failure.
  • P2: bounded regression or missing validation with a concrete failure path.
  • Omit suggestions without a reachable changed failure unless the user asks for them.

Use blocked only when the diff or a critical contract cannot be evaluated.

Output

Verdict: clean | findings | blocked
Reviewed: [changed surfaces and traced call chain]

Findings:
[P1][confidence 94] Title — path:line
Mechanism: [reachable failure]
Evidence: [code, test, runtime, or contract]
Direction: [smallest safe correction]
Validation: [exact check]

Verified non-findings: [important traps checked and rejected]
Verification needed: [at most two below-threshold items]

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.