agentleFS
kensauruskensaurus/cursor-kenji/skills/backend-patterns/SKILL.md

backend-patterns

Skill9 starsChanged 42 days agoMITView on GitHub

Apply backend patterns — queues, caching, rate limits, serverless/edge. Use when "queue jobs", "caching layer", "rate limiting", "server actions", or "edge function". Which architecture to pick → audit-backend-architecture.

88 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use everything-claude-code, investor-materials and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • InfopibeSkill

    everything-claude-code

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • InfopibeSkill

    investor-materials

    Create and update pitch decks, one-pagers, investor memos, accelerator applications, financial models, and fundraising materials. Use when the user needs investor-facing documents, projections, use-of-funds tables, milestone plans, or materials that must stay internally consistent across multiple fundraising assets.

    Also in 29 projects that use this

  • niloykumarbarmanSkill

    agent-sort

    Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle.

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • tpavanipradeepSkill

    bun-runtime

    Bun as runtime, package manager, bundler, and test runner. When to choose Bun vs Node, migration notes, and Vercel support.

    Also in 21 projects that use this

  • mryeastcodeSkill

    everything-claude-code-conventions

    Development conventions and patterns for everything-claude-code. JavaScript project with conventional commits.

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • gongyijie85Skill

    unified-memory

    Share durable, inspectable context and handoffs between Claude, Codex, Hermes, Cursor, OpenCode, and other agents through the local ECC Memory Vault. Use when an agent must save work state, transfer context, resume another agent's task, or search shared project knowledge.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • +1 more from Infopibe

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 26 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Every procedure has a Zod .input().

    line 97
  2. Very specific:

    Verify the webhook signature against the raw body before parsing JSON.

    line 105
  3. Very specific:

    Default: Inngest. inngest.createFunction({ id }, { event }, async ({ event, step }) => ...).

    line 142
  4. Distinctive:

    After implementing backend patterns:

    line 175

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 26 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Backend Patterns Skill

Degree of freedom: MIXED. Which pattern to apply [HIGH freedom]; existing-architecture probes and the validation list [LOW freedom — run exactly].

How to reason

  1. Observe — existing server/api/actions, ORM, queues, cache
  2. Interpret — missing pattern vs duplicate vs wrong layer
  3. Classify — reuse / add-queue / add-cache / add-rate-limit / edge-fn
  4. Severity — unauthenticated mutation outranks a missing cache

Worked example

Observe: createOrder sends email inline; no Inngest/queue; checkout p95 4s. Interpret: confirmation is post-response work, not request-path. Classify: after() or an order/created job; keep the write transactional. Verify: order row commits; email/inventory run after response; retries do not double-charge.

Self-critique before reporting

  • Existing first — searched server/api/actions before adding a second pattern
  • Auth + validate — every mutation checks session and Zod
  • Idempotent — retries on the new path do not double-apply
  • Right owner — which architecture to pick → audit-backend-architecture

Design scalable, maintainable backend architectures using modern patterns and best practices.

Code examples lean on Next.js App Router + Supabase/Prisma. The patterns are stack-agnostic — adapt ORMs, client libraries, and deploy targets to your detected ecosystem.

Check existing first [LOW freedom — run exactly]

Before implementing ANY backend pattern, verify:

  1. Check existing architecture:
ls -la src/server/ src/api/ app/api/ supabase/functions/ 2>/dev/null
cat package.json | grep -i "prisma\|drizzle\|supabase\|trpc"
  1. Check existing patterns:
rg "createTRPCRouter|publicProcedure" --type ts -l
rg "'use server'" --type ts -l
ls -la supabase/migrations/*.sql 2>/dev/null | tail -5
  1. Check database setup:
cat prisma/schema.prisma 2>/dev/null | head -50
cat supabase/config.toml 2>/dev/null

Why: Backend changes have wide impact. Understand existing architecture first.

Server Actions (Next.js 16+) [HIGH freedom]

Next.js 16: Turbopack default; 'use cache' + cacheComponents; reactCompiler: true; middleware.ts → proxy.ts (grep both). Instant navigations → enhance-web-instant-nav.

  • Order inside every action: auth check → Zod safeParse → execute → map known errors (Prisma P2002) → generic failure message.
  • Return ActionResult<T>: { success: true, data } or { success: false, error, fieldErrors? }; never throw to the client.
  • revalidatePath after a successful write.
  • Post-response work (confirmation email, inventory, notifications) goes in after() from next/server, keeping the write transactional.
'use server'
import { after } from 'next/server'

export async function createOrder(formData: FormData) {
  const order = await db.order.create({ data: { /* ... */ } })
  after(async () => {                      // runs after the response is sent
    await sendOrderConfirmation(order.id)
    await updateInventory(order.items)
  })
  revalidatePath('/orders')
  return { success: true, data: order }
}

Full createUser action and the after() example: references/request-patterns.md §Server Actions.

tRPC Setup [HIGH freedom]

  • publicProcedure for reads anyone may do; protectedProcedure for anything that uses ctx.session.
  • Every procedure has a Zod .input(); mutations stamp createdById from the session, not the input.
  • List endpoints paginate by cursor: fetch limit + 1, pop the extra row as nextCursor.

Full usersRouter (getById, create, cursor-paginated list): references/request-patterns.md §tRPC router definition.

Supabase Edge Functions [HIGH freedom]

  • Deno.serve; answer OPTIONS with the CORS headers first.
  • Verify the webhook signature against the raw body before parsing JSON; 401 on mismatch.
  • Admin client from SUPABASE_SERVICE_ROLE_KEY bypasses RLS; use it only inside the function.
  • Catch everything; log server-side, return a generic 500 JSON body with CORS headers.

Full process-webhook function: references/request-patterns.md §Supabase Edge Function.

Database Patterns [HIGH freedom]

  • Optimistic locking — version INT column; UPDATE ... WHERE id = $1 AND version = $2 and treat 0 rows as a concurrent update.
  • Soft deletes — nullable deletedAt with an index; every read filters deletedAt: null; delete sets the timestamp.
  • Audit logging — audit_logs(table_name, record_id, action, old_data, new_data, user_id) filled by a SECURITY DEFINER trigger using TG_OP, row_to_json, auth.uid().
UPDATE orders SET status = 'shipped', version = version + 1
WHERE id = $1 AND version = $2;   -- 0 rows → concurrent update, retry or surface conflict

Soft-delete Prisma model and the full audit trigger: references/data-and-jobs.md §Soft deletes, §Audit logging.

Caching Patterns [HIGH freedom]

  • Next.js: fetch(url, { next: { revalidate, tags } }); revalidateTag on demand; unstable_cache around DB queries with tags.
  • Redis (Upstash): one getCachedData(key, fetcher, ttl) helper, cache-aside; key by entity and id (user:${id}).
  • Pick TTL by staleness tolerance, and always tag so a write can bust the cache.
const getCachedUser = unstable_cache(
  async (id: string) => db.user.findUnique({ where: { id } }),
  ['user'],
  { revalidate: 3600, tags: ['users'] }
)

Next.js cache calls and the Redis helper: references/data-and-jobs.md §Next.js cache, §Redis caching.

Background Jobs [HIGH freedom]

  • Default: Inngest. inngest.createFunction({ id }, { event }, async ({ event, step }) => ...); each side effect in its own step.run so retries resume, not restart.
  • Trigger with inngest.send({ name: 'order/created', data }) from the Server Action after the write commits.
  • Early exit (out of stock) is a step.run + return { status: 'cancelled' }, not a throw.
export const processOrder = inngest.createFunction(
  { id: 'process-order' }, { event: 'order/created' },
  async ({ event, step }) => {
    const payment = await step.run('charge-payment', () => chargeCustomer(event.data.paymentMethod))
    await step.run('send-confirmation', () => sendOrderConfirmation(event.data.orderId))
    return { status: 'completed', paymentId: payment.id }
  }
)

Full Inngest function and the Trigger.dev scheduled-task alternative: references/data-and-jobs.md §Background jobs, §Alternatives.

Rate Limiting [HIGH freedom]

  • @upstash/ratelimit with Ratelimit.slidingWindow(10, '10 s') over Redis.fromEnv().
  • Key by user id (or IP for anonymous); on !success return Too many requests with retryAfter seconds from reset.

Full rateLimitedAction: references/request-patterns.md §Rate limiting.

Architecture patterns (distributed systems) [HIGH freedom]

Gateway, BFF, bulkhead, circuit breaker, outbox+CDC, saga, hexagonal, ACL, and strangler-fig → references/architecture-patterns.md. Pick the pattern for the topology (no mesh on a monolith; no CQRS unless reads/writes diverge). Timeouts/retries/idempotency → audit-resilience; structural gap report → audit-backend-architecture.

Validation [LOW freedom — do not skip]

After implementing backend patterns:

  1. Error handling → All errors caught, logged, safe response returned
  2. Auth checks → Every mutation verifies authentication
  3. Input validation → Zod schema on all inputs
  4. Rate limiting → Sensitive endpoints protected
  5. Idempotency → Critical operations handle retries
  6. Logging → Structured logs without sensitive data
  7. Testing → Unit tests for business logic, integration for APIs

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.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

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.