aws-well-architected-review

# AWS Well-Architected Review Run a lightweight Well-Architected review on a concrete artifact — an architecture diagram/description, Terraform/CDK/CloudFormation, or a design doc — and report risks the way the official framework does: per pillar, severity-rated, each with a specific remediation. This is an engineering review to catch issues early; it complements (does not replace) a formal Well-Architected Tool review with an AWS SA. ## Pillar Selection Load only what the change touches — typically 2-4 pillars, not all six: | Change involves | Load | |-----------------|------| | IAM, network exposure, data handling, secrets | [references/security.md](references/security.md) | | Availability targets, failover, backups, DR | [references/reliability.md](references/reliability.md) | | Instance/database sizing, scaling, latency paths | [references/performance.md](references/performance.md) | | Spend-relevant choices: sizing, storage classes, data transfer, commitment plans | [references/cost.md](references/cost.md) | | Deployment, observability, runbooks, IaC hygiene | [references/operations.md](references/operations.md) | | Region choice, instance generations, utilization, data lifecycle | [references/sustainability.md](references/sustainability.md) | When in doubt for a general "review this architecture" request, default to Security + Reliability + Cost — the three with the highest production-incident and bill impact. ## Review Process 1. **Understand the workload.** Fro...