agentleFS
rengwurengwu/wayfinder-maps/skills/.optional/codebase-design/SKILL.md

codebase-design

Skill137 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 2 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 2

    Common

    Most of the 181 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.

    line 12
  2. Common:

    When designing an interface, ask:

    line 54

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 181 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

Codebase Design

Design deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface. Use this language and these principles wherever code is being designed or restructured. The aim is leverage for callers, locality for maintainers, and testability for everyone.

Glossary

Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.

Module — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. Avoid: unit, component, service.

Interface — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. Avoid: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).

Implementation — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from Adapter: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.

Depth — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is deep when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, shallow when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.

Seam (Michael Feathers) — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the location at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. Avoid: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).

Adapter — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes role (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).

Leverage — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.

Locality — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.

Deep vs shallow

Deep module = small interface + lots of implementation:

┌─────────────────────┐
│   Small Interface   │  ← Few methods, simple params
├─────────────────────┤
│                     │
│  Deep Implementation│  ← Complex logic hidden
│                     │
└─────────────────────┘

Shallow module = large interface + little implementation (avoid):

┌─────────────────────────────────┐
│       Large Interface           │  ← Many methods, complex params
├─────────────────────────────────┤
│  Thin Implementation            │  ← Just passes through
└─────────────────────────────────┘

When designing an interface, ask:

  • Can I reduce the number of entry points?
  • Can I simplify the parameters?
  • Can I hide more complexity inside?

Principles

  • Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation. A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have internal seams (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the external seam at its interface.
  • The deletion test. Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
  • The interface is the test surface. Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test past the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
  • One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one. Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.

Designing for testability

Good interfaces make testing natural (pseudocode — adapt to the project's language):

  1. Accept dependencies, don't create them.

    // Testable — the dependency is passed in
    process_order(order, payment_gateway)
    
    // Hard to test — the dependency is constructed inside
    process_order(order):
        gateway = create StripeGateway()
        ...
  2. Return results, don't produce side effects.

    // Testable — returns a value
    calculate_discount(cart) -> Discount
    
    // Hard to test — mutates in place, returns nothing
    apply_discount(cart):
        cart.total -= discount
  3. Small surface area. Fewer entry points = fewer tests needed. Fewer params = simpler test setup.

Relationships

  • A Module has exactly one Interface (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
  • Depth is a property of a Module, measured against its Interface.
  • A Seam is where a Module's Interface lives.
  • An Adapter sits at a Seam and satisfies the Interface.
  • Depth produces Leverage for callers and Locality for maintainers.

Rejected framings

  • Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
  • "Interface" as a language's interface/trait/typeclass/protocol construct, or a module's public functions: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
  • "Boundary": overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say seam or interface.

Going deeper

  • Deepening a cluster given its dependencies — see DEEPENING.md: dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
  • Exploring alternative interfaces — see DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md: design the interface several radically different ways (in parallel subagents where the environment supports them), then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions194 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 165

    1. mattpocock/skills★ 309k91% same
    2. danny-avila/LibreChat★ 47k91% same
    3. LibreChat-AI/LibreChat★ 47k91% same
    4. QuivrHQ/quivr★ 40k91% same
    5. windmill-labs/windmill★ 18k88% same
    6. MODSetter/SurfSense★ 17k91% same
    7. GreyDGL/PentestGPT★ 16k91% same
    8. formbricks/formbricks★ 13k91% same
    9. humanlayer/humanlayer★ 13k91% same
    10. openstatusHQ/openstatus★ 9.2k91% same

    155 more not listed

    Wrote their own version · 29

    1. vinvcn/mattpocock-skills-zh-CN★ 5.5ksame name
    2. stevesolun/ctx★ 583same name
    3. devcxl/mattpocock-skills-zh★ 522same name
    4. OyadotAI/oya-browser★ 351same name
    5. ahonn/dotfiles★ 62same name
    6. WenWuZhiDao/mattpocock-skills-zh★ 27same name
    7. sgaabdu4/building-flutter-apps★ 25same name
    8. kriscard/Skills★ 15same name
    9. eralmansouri/skills★ 9same name
    10. imMamdouhaboammar/matts-skills-into-chatgpt★ 8same name

    19 more not listed

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use decision-mapping, setup-ts-deep-modules 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.
    • FabienDehopreSkill

      decision-mapping

      Turn a loose idea into a sequenced map of investigation tickets, then drive them to resolution one at a time.

      Also in 8 projects that use this

    • liufeng1976Skill

      setup-ts-deep-modules

      Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module — implementation hidden in subfolders, reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.

      Also in 33 projects that use this

    • RoentekSkill

      loop-me

      Grill me about specs for the workflows I want to build, within this workspace.

      Also in 46 projects that use this

    • AWSSkill

      to-questionnaire

      Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.

      Also in 76 projects that use this

    • LesaniSkill

      writing-beats

      Shape an article as a journey of beats, choose-your-own-adventure style. The user picks a starting beat from the raw material, you write only that beat, then offer options for where to pivot next, beat by beat, until the article reaches a natural end. Use when the user has raw material and wants to assemble it as a narrative rather than an argument.

      Also in 50 projects that use this

    • AWSSkill

      wizard

      Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.

      Also in 105 projects that use this

    • +1 more from aws
  • In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.

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.