Use when choosing how to structure code for a recurring problem. Covers the patterns that earn their keep, the ones that usually do not, and how to recognize when a pattern is being applied for its own sake.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection --skill design-patterns --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Design Patterns?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/nimadorostkar-design-patterns)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: design-patterns
description: Use when choosing how to structure code for a recurring problem. Covers the patterns that earn their keep, the ones that usually do not, and how to recognize when a pattern is being applied for its own sake.
metadata:
category: development
version: 1.0.0
tags: [design-patterns, architecture, solid, abstraction]
---
# Design Patterns
## Purpose
Apply structural patterns as solutions to problems you actually have. A pattern applied prophylactically is just indirection with a formal name.
## When to Use
- A problem recurs and the current structure requires a change in many places each time.
- Choosing between inheritance, composition, and configuration.
- Reviewing code that is heavily abstracted and hard to follow.
- Designing an extension point for third parties.
## Capabilities
- Creational: factory, builder, dependency injection.
- Structural: adapter, facade, decorator, proxy.
- Behavioral: strategy, observer, command, state machine.
- Concurrency: producer-consumer, worker pool, circuit breaker.
- Recognizing pattern misuse: the singleton-as-global, the abstract factory of one.
## Inputs
- The problem being solved and how often it recurs.
- The axis of expected change — what varies, and what stays fixed.
- Who extends the code: you, your team, or external consumers.
## Outputs
- A structure with a named rationale.
- The specific change it makes cheap, stated explicitly.
## Workflow
1. **Name the axis of variation.** A pattern buys flexibility along exactly one axis, at the cost of indirection along all of them. If you cannot name the axis, do not apply a pattern.
2. **Count the instances.** One implementation needs no strategy interface. Two might. Three definitely does.
3. **Choose the lightest structure that works.** A function passed as a parameter is a strategy. It does not need a class hierarchy.
4. **Write it concretely first.** Then extract the pattern when the second case arrives — the shape of the abstraction will be obvious rather than guessed.
5. **Justify the indirection.** If a reader must open three files to answer "what happens when I call this", the pattern is costing more than it returns.
## Best Practices
- Composition over inheritance, nearly always. Inheritance couples you to the parent's internals forever.
- Strategy, adapter, and decorator earn their keep constantly. Abstract factory and visitor rarely do outside frameworks.
- A singleton is a global variable with better manners. Use dependency injection instead — it makes the dependency visible and the code testable.
- A state machine with explicit states and transitions beats a tangle of boolean flags every time.
- Circuit breakers, retries, and timeouts are patterns too, and they are more likely to save you than any of the Gang of Four.
- Two similar pieces of code are not necessarily duplication. Deduplicating things that merely look alike couples things that change for different reasons.
## Examples
**Explicit state machine instead of boolean soup:**
```python
# Before: state is implied by three booleans, and half the combinations are invalid.
if order.is_paid and not order.is_shipped and not order.is_cancelled:
ship(order)
# After: states are enumerated, transitions are the only way to move.
class OrderState(Enum):
PENDING = auto()
PAID = auto()
SHIPPED = auto()
CANCELLED = auto()
TRANSITIONS: dict[OrderState, set[OrderState]] = {
OrderState.PENDING: {OrderState.PAID, OrderState.CANCELLED},
OrderState.PAID: {OrderState.SHIPPED, OrderState.CANCELLED},
OrderState.SHIPPED: set(),
OrderState.CANCELLED: set(),
}
def transition(order: Order, to: OrderState) -> None:
if to not in TRANSITIONS[order.state]:
raise InvalidTransition(f"{order.state.name} -> {to.name}")
order.state = to
```
Invalid states are now unrepresentable, and the legal transitions are readable in one place.
## Notes
- The dependency-inversion principle is about direction, not about interfaces. An interface with exactly one implementation, created only to "follow the principle", inverts nothing.
- Facades are the most under-used pattern in large codebases: a single, small entry point to a subsystem does more for comprehensibility than any amount of internal cleanliness.
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!