Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Ln 25 Architecture Diagram Builder

ASecurity

Creates evidence-backed current or target architecture diagrams; not UI design.

566 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 9/21/2026
developmentrustgonodesecuritydocumentation

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 9/21/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-25-architecture-diagram-builder --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Ln 25 Architecture Diagram Builder?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Ln 25 Architecture Diagram Builder
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/levnikolaevich-ln-25-architecture-diagram-builder/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/levnikolaevich-ln-25-architecture-diagram-builder)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: ln-25-architecture-diagram-builder
description: "Creates evidence-backed current or target architecture diagrams; not UI design."
---

# Architecture Diagram Builder

**Goal:** Create the smallest set of understandable, evidence-backed diagrams needed to communicate current or proposed architecture. Change only approved architecture documentation; do not invent relationships, perform visual product design, replace prose evidence, audit fitness, or edit implementation.

**Execution contract:** The checklist defines completion. Track each item internally as `PENDING`, `PROVEN` with evidence, `CLEARED` with evidence its condition is absent, or `UNPROVEN` with a gap; reading, delegation, or tool failure is not proof. Reconcile after each section. Before returning, resolve all `PENDING`, count only `PROVEN` and `CLEARED`, and apply verdict and approval rules to every gap.
Preserve intent, scope, and existing authorization. Continue authorized work; ask only for consequential unresolved choices or required external approval. Scale depth to material risk without skipping checks. Preserve dependency and safety order; otherwise choose an appropriate verification method.
Accept equivalent user or repository evidence; no other skill, named artifact, or complete lifecycle is required. Preserve source requirement and decision IDs. Bind reused evidence to relevant source versions, dirty changes, configuration, and environment; invalidate only affected claims.
On continuation, reconcile task, authorization, current state, and unresolved evidence. For long work, return a compact continuation record or update an already authorized artifact; read-only skills do not persist it. Distinguish artifact readiness, verified behavior, and external-action authority.
Prepare authorized work before required approval. If blocked by an instruction, cite its exact source and unresolved boundary; do not invent approval gates from caution.


## Tool Routing

| Need | Preferred capability | Fallback |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture evidence | Repository files, runtime wiring, IaC, contracts, and approved artifacts | User-provided model with `UNVERIFIED` labels |
| Relationship tracing | Language intelligence, dependency tools, and focused search | Direct inspection of producers, consumers, and registrations |
| Diagram format | Existing repository convention and renderer | Mermaid in Markdown, then plain ASCII |
| Syntax verification | Repository renderer, parser, or preview | Manual fence, identifier, and relationship inspection |
| Document mutation | Minimal patch to approved diagram artifacts | Return `BLOCKED` if path or evidence boundary is unsafe |

Diagrams communicate a model; executable behavior remains authoritative for current state. Keep current, target, and transition views visibly distinct.

## Artifact Rules

- Reuse an existing diagram convention or use `docs/architecture/diagrams/<view>.md`.
- Prefer Markdown with Mermaid for text-reviewable source; use ASCII when Mermaid is unsupported.
- For static structure, choose the context, container, or component level that answers the requested question; do not create prerequisite overview diagrams when existing context suffices.
- Keep diagram source reviewable in version control.
- Split views when one diagram needs multiple unrelated stories.
- Never use color as the only carrier of meaning.
- Use stable element identifiers and concise display labels so revisions produce reviewable diffs.
- Keep detailed evidence beside the diagram rather than crowding nodes and relationships.
- Preserve an understandable existing notation; introduce a new notation only when it answers the audience question better.

## Checklist

### 1. Establish the Diagram Contract

- [ ] Resolve audience, question, current or target state, scope, approved destination, and required notation.
- [ ] Read repository instructions, relevant architecture artifacts, and existing diagram conventions.
- [ ] Select the minimum useful view or views; reject diagrams that add no relationship clarity.
- [ ] Define the evidence boundary and label user-supplied or proposed elements separately.
- [ ] Keep the run read-only except for approved architecture diagram documentation.

### 2. Build the Architecture Model

- [ ] Identify relevant people, systems, applications/data stores (C4 containers when using C4), components, queues, and external dependencies; distinguish logical containers from OS/container-runtime deployment units.
- [ ] Record responsibility, type, technology when decision-relevant, owner when known, and current/target status for each element.
- [ ] Resolve relationship direction, label, protocol or data, synchronicity, and trust or network boundary where relevant.
- [ ] Trace runtime discovery and registration before including current-state routes, handlers, jobs, plugins, or consumers.
- [ ] Mark uncertain elements or relationships `UNKNOWN` rather than completing the picture aesthetically.

### 3. Select and Draw Views

- [ ] Create a system-context view when readers need system scope and external actors.
- [ ] Create a container or deployment view for responsibilities, deployability, stores, or operational topology; include nodes, regions, networks, scaling, and failover when relevant to the audience question.
- [ ] Create a component view only for a complex area whose internal boundaries change understanding.
- [ ] Create sequence or dynamic views for critical success, failure, retry, timeout, recovery, or migration interactions.
- [ ] Create data-flow or trust-boundary views when security, privacy, residency, or system-of-record questions require them.
- [ ] Avoid mixing abstraction levels in one view unless the exception is explicit and necessary.

### 4. Make the Diagram Self-Describing

- [ ] Add title, diagram type, scope, current/target marker, intended audience, and observation or proposal date.
- [ ] Add a legend for shapes, colors, line styles, abbreviations, and uncertainty markers.
- [ ] Label every relationship with intent or data; avoid generic arrows and unexplained acronyms.
- [ ] Keep names consistent with code, contracts, and shared architecture documents.
- [ ] Add compact evidence notes or links sufficient to trace current-state claims.

### 5. Verify and Report

- [ ] Validate syntax with the repository renderer or perform a complete manual syntax inspection.
- [ ] Inspect rendered readability when a preview is available and split overloaded views rather than shrinking labels. Without a renderer, record visual readability as `UNPROVEN`; manual syntax inspection is not render proof.
- [ ] Verify current-state elements and relationships against implementation evidence, and target-state elements against the declared proposal or explicitly labelled assumptions.
- [ ] Bind each view to current or proposed architecture and its authoritative source; expose contradictions rather than resolving them silently in a diagram.
- [ ] Use `READY` when diagrams are valid, scoped, evidenced, and readable at the requested fidelity; use `INCONCLUSIVE` for material unknown relationships or missing required render evidence; use `BLOCKED` when scope, evidence, format, or destination prevents a trustworthy diagram.

## Self-Check

- [ ] **Reconcile before returning.** Check item-level evidence, requirement coverage, contradictions, scope, verdict, and applicable cleanup. Correct the report or authorized artifacts. Reuse valid evidence; do not automatically rescan the repository or rerun successful commands. Repeat checks only for relevant changes, failures, or unresolved evidence. Disclose remaining gaps.

## Output Contract

Report in the user's language, in this order; retain all five fields and state each fact once. Small results may use one line per field; omit empty tables and do not copy linked artifacts:

1. **Result:** Skill-specific verdict and supported outcome.
2. **Scope:** Reviewed/changed scope, exclusions, baseline, and material assumptions.
3. **Evidence:** Skill-specific fields below; distinguish facts, inferences, and unverified claims. Link artifacts; use tables when useful.
4. **Verification:** Checks/results, unavailable evidence, and applicable cleanup/external state.
5. **Completion:** `Checklist: X/Y complete`; `Incomplete: None` or each `UNPROVEN` item's reason, outcome impact, and exact next action; residual risks and required decisions.

**Skill-specific evidence:** Artifact paths; each view’s current/target state, audience question, and evidence basis. Report syntax/render verification and current-state relationship checks, unknown relationships, and rendering limits that affect interpretation.

Attribution

levnikolaevichlevnikolaevich
View sourceMore from levnikolaevich →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Related Skills

Browser Extension Developer

Use this skill when developing or maintaining browser extension code in the `browser/` directory, including Chrome/Firefox/Edge compatibility, content scripts, background scripts, or i18n updates.

284722 votes

Seo Optimizer

SEO optimization with keyword analysis, readability assessment, technical validation, content quality. Use for search rankings, blog posts, content audits, or encountering keyword density, readability scores, meta tags, schema markup errors.

2192 votes

Google Official Seo Guide

Official Google SEO guide covering search optimization, best practices, Search Console, crawling, indexing, and improving website search visibility based on official Google documentation

1862 votes

Tanstack Start

Build a full-stack TanStack Start app on Cloudflare Workers from scratch — SSR, file-based routing, server functions, D1+Drizzle, better-auth, Tailwind v4+shadcn/ui. Use whenever the user mentions TanStack Start, asks to scaffold a full-stack Cloudflare app with SSR, wants an SSR dashboard, or asks for a React 19 + Cloudflare Workers app with file-based routing and server functions — even if they don't name TanStack Start specifically. No template repo — Claude generates every file fresh per ...

9881 votes

Pentest

PTES-aligned adversarial security audit for backend, frontend, and mobile applications. Produces a CVSS-scored Hacker Report with verified PoCs and phased remediation.

5491 votes
View all in development →