architecture-review

architecture-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from cniska/skills. It costs 25 tokens per session (987 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review guide for checking how parts of a software system are separated and connected. It looks at module boundaries, shared rules, and places where the design makes future changes harder.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review module boundaries, extension points for adding features, dependency direction, and consistency between data contracts and their users.
Why use it?
It helps find unnecessary layers, duplicated wrappers, tangled dependencies, and mismatched contracts before they make the code harder to change.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it to review module boundaries, extension points for adding features, dependency direction, and consistency between data contracts and their users.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add cniska/skills --skill architecture-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cniska/skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for architecture-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for architecture-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cniska/skills/architecture-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 25 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 987 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00025 $0.00987
Opus 5 $0.00013 $0.00494
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00197
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00099

Measured 12d ago against content hash ee790f82d236, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

architecture-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/architecture-review/SKILL.md · 89 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 89 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Architecture Review

Review architecture quality, design consistency, extension seams, and pattern adherence.

Scope

1. Indirection pressure (primary focus)

Flag layers that add no architectural value:

  • runtime import cycles across split modules
  • pass-through facades that only rename or re-export
  • alias/wrapper layers without independent policy or invariants
  • DI bags exceeding practical seam or testing needs
  • singleton imports in library modules that should accept injected params — an application reading its own central store is idiomatic and not this finding
  • facade-for-facade chains

Default: if a layer carries no policy, invariants, or boundary isolation, remove it.

2. Extension blockers

  • hard-coded behavior where project docs or an existing sibling seam establish a policy/config point
  • new features requiring edits across many unrelated modules
  • private coupling preventing additive providers or plugins
  • extension seams with no current use adding maintenance cost

3. Boundary and contract integrity

  • contracts and schemas as source of truth
  • renamed contract terms stay aligned across the boundary; partial renames count as drift
  • dependency direction consistency
  • design-pattern consistency for extension seams
  • logic that reads another module's state more than its own; judge one function body at a time — how much of it traverses that module — not by whether the reference was injected or passed in
  • chained access (a.getB().getC()) reaching past a stated contract into internals the caller doesn't own
  • modules reaching into each other's internals instead of through a stated contract

4. Cohesion and responsibility

  • oversized or multi-responsibility files — for a file, size alone isn't the finding, so name the second responsibility or don't report it
  • SRP violations: mixing unrelated concerns
  • at function scale length is a finding on its own: a body past ~50 lines, one needing section comments to navigate, or one that computes a result and then formats it for presentation. An exhaustive match or switch whose length is entirely its arms is not this — there is no substructure to lift out
  • duplication wants a name once it is a substantial block repeated twice or a small one repeated three times, in one file or across modules — size and copy count trade off against each other, so a two-line body appearing seven times counts. Leave what is duplicated on purpose: boundary-local copies keeping two modules independent, and conditionally-compiled twins that merging would defeat

Read the full file on GitHub · 89 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 12d ago First seen · 89 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A ee790f82d236

Subscribe to this mod's changes

architecture-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cniska/skills (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 987 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.