architecture-health-scanner

Solid

Interpret and triage architecture scanner output — cluster findings by module and root cause, classify true positives vs false positives vs acceptable design, produce a prioritized remediation plan (Fix Now / Fix Soon / Document / Ignore). Use after the scanner runs when there are findings to analyze. Trigger on 'scanner results/findings/output', 'triage findings', 'coupling violations', 'cross-service imports', 'architectural violations', 'tech debt triage', 'architecture health scan', 'structural drift', 'remediation plan from scan', or when a refactor touched 3+ files/modules and you want to check for new violations. Do NOT use for single-file bug fixes, code review, library docs, linter config, project health checks (hooks/state/config), or writing new endpoints.

AI & Automation 0 stars 1 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 78/100

Stars 20%
0
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Architecture Health Scanner ## Overview This skill teaches how to interpret scanner output, not how to run the scanner. The project provides its own scanner tool (configured in `.devt/config.json` under `arch_scanner.command`). This skill turns raw findings into a prioritized remediation plan. Raw scanner output is noise. Interpretation converts noise into signal by clustering related findings, identifying root causes, and separating true problems from acceptable trade-offs. ## When NOT to Use Skip for single-file changes or bug fixes that don't touch module boundaries. If the change is isolated to one module with no cross-boundary imports, this skill adds overhead without value. ## Time Budget Quick scan: **2-3 minutes**. Full scan with triage: **5-10 minutes**. ## The Iron Law ``` NO CLASSIFICATION WITHOUT READING THE ACTUAL CODE ``` Scanner output is claims, not facts. Every finding must be verified by reading the code at the reported location before being classified as true positive or false positive. Scanner output contains false positives and context-dependent findings that cannot be classified from the report alone. A coupling warning between two modules might be an intentional design decision or a genuine violation — only reading the actual code reveals which. Misclassified findings waste developer time or, worse, dismiss real architectural drift. ## The Process ### Step 1: Verify Scanner Was Run Check that scanner output exists. The scanner command is...

Details

Author
emrecdr
Repository
emrecdr/devt
Created
4 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
JavaScript
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

Data & Documents Solid

architectural-analysis

Performs deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.

128 Updated today
testdouble
Code & Development Listed

improve

Scan an existing codebase for module-level friction and architecture improvement opportunities. Explores for shallow modules (interface nearly as complex as implementation), seam leaks, and locality gaps; presents candidates as a self-contained HTML report; runs an interview loop on the selected candidate, with a Design-It-Twice branch that fans out parallel subagents to design the interface several radically different ways; hands off an agreed candidate shape for planning. Use when: 'improve architecture', 'find deepening opportunities', 'shallow modules', 'architecture improvement', 'Ousterhout deepening', 'design it twice', 'compare alternative interfaces', 'make code more testable', 'make code more AI-navigable', 'find refactoring opportunities', 'what should we improve', 'architecture scan', 'codebase friction', 'module seams', 'locality'. Skip when: applying mechanical code-level tidyings (this operates at module level), reviewing a diff before merge, enforcing architecture rules on a change, or root-ca

5 Updated today
melodic-software
Data & Documents Listed

ridge

Architecture analysis for codebases. Use when the user asks about repository structure, dependencies, blast radius, data flow, service boundaries, architecture drift, diagrams, or validation against rules. Triggers include "analyze architecture", "show me dependencies", "what would break if I change X", "draw a diagram of this project", "is this a monolith or microservices", "what changed architecturally since vN", "give me a Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/Structurizr/draw.io/Excalidraw diagram", "save this architecture as a baseline", "what's drifted since baseline". Do NOT use for single-function complexity (use code-review tools), runtime profiling (out of scope), or content questions about non-code files outside markdown vaults.

5 Updated yesterday
olgasafonova