create-architecture
Skill1 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Author the architecture blueprint before code is written. Validates decisions against the pinned engine, flags knowledge gaps.
12 other projects use a version of this, 7 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiosedited, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- fnayou/dotfilestheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiosedited, first seen Oct 19, 2026
- ShiningPlague/shiningplague-studiotheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Pluginedited, first seen Oct 5, 2026
- dawn840705/claude-code-studiosedited, first seen Aug 28, 2026
Other versions12 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 7
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27k97% same
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 11812% same
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 1710% same
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 812% same
- hongyuanc/codex-game-studios★ 512% same
- dawn840705/claude-code-studios★ 111% same
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugin★ 116% same
Wrote their own version · 5
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- adolfoaranaes12/BMAD-ENHANCED★ 2same name
- ailess-lab/CCFG★ 2same name
- fnayou/dotfiles★ 2same name
- ShiningPlague/shiningplague-studio★ 0same name
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.
In this repository153 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CCGS Skill Testing Framework/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- design/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- docs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- src/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adoptSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- art-bibleSkill
- asset-auditSkill
- asset-specSkill
- balance-checkSkill
- brainstormSkill
- bug-reportSkill
- bug-triageSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- consistency-checkSkill
- content-auditSkill
- create-architectureSkill
- create-control-manifestSkill
- create-epicsSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- day-one-patchSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- estimateSkill
- gate-checkSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- launch-checklistSkill
- localizeSkill
- map-systemsSkill
- milestone-reviewSkill
- onboardSkill
- patch-notesSkill
- perf-profileSkill
- playtest-reportSkill
- project-stage-detectSkill
- propagate-design-changeSkill
- prototypeSkill
- qa-planSkill
- quick-designSkill
- regression-suiteSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- reverse-documentSkill
- review-all-gddsSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- settingsSkill
- setup-engineSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- skill-testSkill
- smoke-checkSkill
- soak-testSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 26
Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md (collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and …
- Distinctive: line 100
Never ask approval for a section the user has not yet seen.
- Distinctive: line 113
Never make a binding architectural decision without user input.
- Very specific: line 120
Run /architecture-decision [title] for each required ADR listed in Phase 6 — Foundation layer ADRs first
- Very specific: line 121
Run /architecture-review — bootstraps the Requirements Traceability Matrix and TR registry from the ADRs just written.
- Very specific: line 122
Run /test-setup to scaffold tests/unit/, tests/integration/, CI workflow, and an example test (required for gate-check)
- Very specific: line 123
Run /ux-design to initialize design/ux/interaction-patterns.md and design/accessibility-requirements.md (required for gate-check)
- Very specific: line 124
Run /create-control-manifest once the required ADRs are written to produce the layer rules manifest
- Very specific: line 125
Run /gate-check pre-production when all required ADRs, /test-setup, and /ux-design are complete
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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.
Files
!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density
Resolved above — use as-is; --review overrides review_mode. No block →
defaults in .claude/docs/config-resolution.md.
Create Architecture
This skill produces docs/architecture/architecture.md — the master architecture
document that translates all approved GDDs into a concrete technical blueprint.
It sits between design and implementation, and must exist before sprint planning begins.
Distinct from /architecture-decision: ADRs record individual point decisions.
This skill creates the whole-system blueprint that gives ADRs their context.
See .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in .claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
automation_always_ask categories always prompt).
docs.density — it controls per-section depth, where workflow
controls which sections exist. modes.rigor sets both together; set
docs.density explicitly to vary depth alone: terse (the default, via rigor: minimal) = layer diagrams + decision bullets,
no essays; balanced = diagrams + paragraph explanations of layer choices
(rigor: standard); thorough = full prose with rationale, trade-offs, and alternatives
considered per layer. Apply it to every section you author.
workflow (see .claude/docs/workflow-modes.md):
full— full architecture: all layers, module ownership, data flow, API boundaries, full ADR audit.standard— simplified: system layer map + critical ADR list only.minimal— not required. Can still be run voluntarily.
Argument modes:
- No argument /
full: Full guided walkthrough — all sections, start to finish layers: Focus on the system layer diagram onlydata-flow: Focus on data flow between modules onlyapi-boundaries: Focus on API boundary definitions onlyadr-audit: Audit existing ADRs for engine compatibility gaps only
Phase 0: Load All Context
Read references/0-load-context.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 1: System Layer Mapping
Read references/1-layers.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 2: Module Ownership Map
Read references/2-module-ownership.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 3: Data Flow
Read references/3-data-flow.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 4: API Boundaries
Read references/4-api-boundaries.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 5: ADR Audit + Traceability Check
Read references/5-adr-audit.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 6: Missing ADR List
Read references/6-missing-adrs.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 7: Write the Master Architecture Document
Read references/7-write.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Phase 8: Handoff
Read references/8-handoff.md now and follow it — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Collaborative Protocol
Applies in collaborative mode (the default). For guided and
autonomous modes, see .claude/docs/automation-modes.md — the rules below
describe what collaborative mode requires, not universal behavior.
This skill follows the collaborative design principle at every phase:
- Load context silently — do not narrate file reads
- Present findings — show the knowledge gap inventory and layer proposals
- Ask before deciding — present options for each architectural choice
- Draft before approval — show the content inline before asking to write it. Never ask approval for a section the user has not yet seen.
- Use
AskUserQuestionfor write approvals — plain text "May I?" is not sufficient. Use the structured tool with labeled options [A]/[B]/[C] (write now / show full draft first / not yet). For multi-file changesets, list every file and what changes, then ask once grouped — not separate plain-text asks per file. - One write, after every section is approved — the document is written once,
at Phase 7; Phase 7b's Step 4 only updates its Document Status, after its own
ask. Record each approved section's decisions in
production/session-state/active.mdas you go, so a crash loses no decision. A revision that Phase 7b forces is written the same way — once, after its re-drafted sections are approved — and an update (Phase 0e) writes only the sections it chose.
Never make a binding architectural decision without user input. If the user is unsure, present 2-4 options with pros/cons before asking them to decide.
Recommended Next Steps
- Run
/architecture-decision [title]for each required ADR listed in Phase 6 — Foundation layer ADRs first - Run
/architecture-review— bootstraps the Requirements Traceability Matrix and TR registry from the ADRs just written. Required before the Pre-Production gate. - Run
/test-setupto scaffoldtests/unit/,tests/integration/, CI workflow, and an example test (required for gate-check) - Run
/ux-designto initializedesign/ux/interaction-patterns.mdanddesign/accessibility-requirements.md(required for gate-check) - Run
/create-control-manifestonce the required ADRs are written to produce the layer rules manifest - Run
/gate-check pre-productionwhen all required ADRs,/test-setup, and/ux-designare complete
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
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.

