Architecture Review
Conducts comprehensive multi-perspective architecture reviews with all team members.
Process Overview
-
Determine Scope - Identify what to review (version, feature, or component)
-
Load Team - Read members from .architecture/members.yml and check pragmatic mode
-
Analyze System - Examine architecture using Read, Glob, Grep, and git tools
-
Individual Reviews - Each member reviews from their specialized perspective
-
Collaborative Discussion - Synthesize findings and establish priorities
-
Create Document - Generate comprehensive review using template
-
Report Results - Summarize findings and next steps for user
Detailed guidance: references/review-process.md
Workflow Steps
- Determine Scope
Identify review target and create filename:
-
Version: "version X.Y.Z" → X-Y-Z.md
-
Feature: "feature name" → feature-kebab-case.md
-
Component: "component name" → component-kebab-case.md
Apply input validation (see _patterns.md § Filename Sanitization).
- Load Configuration and Team
cat .architecture/config.yml # Check pragmatic_mode.enabled cat .architecture/members.yml # Load all members
Include Pragmatic Enforcer if pragmatic mode enabled for reviews.
- Analyze the Target
Use available tools to examine the system:
-
Read
-
Code, configs, documentation
-
Glob
-
Find files by pattern
-
Grep
-
Search for specific patterns
-
Bash(git:*)
-
Git history and status
Focus based on review type:
-
Version: Overall architecture, components, patterns, technical debt
-
Feature: Implementation, integration, security, performance
-
Component: Structure, dependencies, boundaries, interfaces
- Conduct Individual Member Reviews
For each member in members.yml , write a review including:
-
Perspective statement
-
Key observations (3-5)
-
Strengths (3-5)
-
Concerns with impact and recommendations (3-7)
-
Prioritized recommendations with effort estimates (3-7)
Format details: references/review-process.md § Individual Member Review Format
Pragmatic integration: If enabled, add pragmatic analysis after each member. See references/pragmatic-integration.md
- Facilitate Collaborative Discussion
Synthesize findings:
-
Identify common concerns
-
Discuss disagreements
-
Establish consensus
-
Prioritize: Critical (0-2 weeks) | Important (2-8 weeks) | Nice-to-Have (2-6 months)
Discussion format: references/review-process.md § Collaborative Discussion
- Create Review Document
Load template and fill in all sections:
cat .claude/skills/architecture-review/assets/review-template.md
Include:
-
Executive summary and overall assessment
-
Individual member reviews
-
Collaborative discussion
-
Consolidated findings (strengths, improvements, debt, risks)
-
Recommendations (immediate, short-term, long-term)
-
Success metrics and follow-up plan
Save to .architecture/reviews/[filename].md
Template: assets/review-template.md
- Report to User
Architecture Review Complete: [Target]
Location: .architecture/reviews/[filename].md Overall Assessment: [Strong | Adequate | Needs Improvement]
Top 3 Priorities:
- [Priority 1]
- [Priority 2]
- [Priority 3]
Immediate Actions:
- [Action 1]
- [Action 2]
Next Steps:
- Review with team
- "Start architecture recalibration for [target]"
- Create ADRs for key decisions
Related Skills
Before: architecture-status , list-members
During: specialist-review , create-adr
After: architecture-recalibration , create-adr
Documentation
-
Process guide: references/review-process.md
-
Pragmatic mode: references/pragmatic-integration.md
-
Template: assets/review-template.md
-
Patterns: ../_patterns.md