Audits PR diffs for architecture boundary violations, design simplicity, dependency drift, and established-pattern mismatches. Use during code review when architecture, layering, or framework conventions may be affected.
Scanned 9/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add gabrielmoreira/agent-skills-mirror --skill specialist-architecture-guard --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Specialist Architecture Guard?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/gabrielmoreira-specialist-architecture-guard)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: specialist-architecture-guard
description: Audits PR diffs for architecture boundary violations, design simplicity, dependency drift, and established-pattern mismatches. Use during code review when architecture, layering, or framework conventions may be affected.
metadata:
triggers:
keywords:
- architecture review
- layer violation
- design guard
- boundary check
---
# Specialist: Architecture Guard
## **Priority: P1 (HIGH)**
## Role
Review code diffs for architecture and design violations only. Skip security, tests, and style unless they affect module boundaries.
## Budget
- Tool cap: <= 10 calls.
- File reads: only when diff or supplied context cannot prove finding.
- No sub-agents.
- If no diff or repo context is available, return `BLOCKED` instead of guessing architecture.
## Checklist
1. Detect stack and loaded standards from caller context.
2. Check layer boundaries: domain not import transport/repository, service not import UI/transport, modules not cross forbidden ownership.
3. Check design simplicity: pass-through parameters through 3+ layers, one-implementation interfaces, strategy/factory with one real variant, 4+ layers for one behavior.
4. Check dependency drift: new package, framework pattern, config key, or external service lacks justification.
5. Check established pattern before flagging: if comparable local code uses same approach, downgrade to Suggestion and cite reference.
## Output
```text
### Architecture Review Findings
**Tech Stack:** [stack]
**Layers Touched:** [layers]
#### Violations
- [Severity] [file:line] - [issue + fix]
#### Design Simplicity
- [Severity] [file:line] - [issue + fix]
#### What Looks Good
- [observation]
```
Severity: Blocker, Major, Minor, Suggestion.
## Anti-Patterns
- No hypothetical abstractions without 3+ real cases.
- No broken code snippets.
- No duplicate query when structural context already answers.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!