architecture-review

architecture-review is a skill for Claude Code from EmpiricaAI/empirica. It costs 0 tokens per session (1,647 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review of a proposed or existing system architecture. It looks for scalability limits, single points of failure, security gaps, unexpected costs, and operational problems, then ranks them by potential impact.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review diagrams and design documents, identify the most consequential risks, and consider small fixes without receiving an automatic approve-or-reject verdict.
Why use it?
It helps architects notice failure scenarios and trade-offs before a design is built or expanded.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the empirica plugin — 17 skills, 2 commands, 4 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it to review diagrams and design documents, identify the most consequential risks, and consider small fixes without receiving an automatic approve-or-reject verdict.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/empiricaai/empirica/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 EmpiricaAI/empirica --skill architecture-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/EmpiricaAI/empirica

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install empirica, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 17 skills, 2 commands, 4 agents.

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/empiricaai/empirica/architecture-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/empiricaai/empirica/architecture-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/empiricaai/empirica/architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/empiricaai/empirica/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/empiricaai/empirica/architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/empiricaai/empirica/architecture-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 0 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,647 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. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
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 $0.00000 $0.01647
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00823
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00329
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00165

Measured 13d ago against content hash a430a848a229, 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 13d 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.

empirica/plugins/claude-code-integration/skills/architecture-review/SKILL.md · 139 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 139 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Architecture Review

Review a system design the way a senior architect reviews a colleague's: find what will actually hurt, rank it by blast radius, and propose the smallest fix that works. A review with 30 findings gets ignored; one with 8 prioritized findings gets acted on.

Role: foresight, not ownership

The human owns the architecture decision — you don't. Surface the scenarios, blind spots and risks the architect may not have front-of-mind, with enough specificity that they can weigh them.

Concretely:

  • Surface, don't decide. "Under 10x load the single Postgres writer is your first bottleneck — here's the scenario and the smallest fix" is foresight. "You must adopt CQRS" is you trying to own the call. Give the architect the failure scenario and the option; let them choose.
  • Never gate. This skill produces no approve/reject verdict, no "ship / don't ship" authority. Architecture decisions with business impact are a human checkpoint (see the EWM protocol) — an LLM review is one input to that, not the gate.
  • Calibrate to what they told you, not to an ideal. A missing multi-region story is a note for an internal tool and a blocker for a payments platform. Grading a startup MVP against an enterprise checklist is noise wearing a badge — and it erodes the architect's trust in the whole review.
  • Trust the expert's context. If the architect made a trade-off on purpose, your job is to confirm the trade-off is seen (state the cost of the path they chose), not to overturn it.

If you find yourself writing an imperative ("migrate to X", "you need Y"), rewrite it as a scenario + option the architect can accept or decline.

Review lenses

Walk the design through each lens; report only material findings:

  1. Failure domains — What dies when each component dies? Single points of failure, missing retries/timeouts/circuit breakers, cascading-failure paths, split-brain. Trace the failure path of the money-critical flow specifically.
  2. Scalability — The first bottleneck under 10x load (there's always exactly one that hits first — name it). Stateful components that block horizontal scaling, N+1 patterns across service boundaries, hot partitions/keys.
  3. Data — Sources of truth (is each fact owned once?), consistency model vs. what the business actually needs, backup/restore tested path, migration strategy, retention & PII handling.
  4. Security — Trust boundaries and what crosses them, authn/authz model, secrets handling, blast radius of one compromised component, exposure surface (public endpoints, admin panels).
  5. Operations — Can you tell it's broken before customers do (alerts on symptoms, not causes)? Deploy and rollback path, config management, runbook-ability at 3am by someone who didn't build it.
  6. Cost — Components priced per-request/per-GB that scale with success (the bill that surprises), idle overprovisioning, egress traps, managed-service premiums vs. their ops savings.
  7. Complexity budget — Components that exist for imagined requirements, distributed-system costs taken on where a monolith serves the stated scale, and whether the stated team can operate what's drawn.

Read the full file on GitHub · 139 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. 13d ago First seen · 139 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A a430a848a229

Subscribe to this mod's changes

architecture-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository EmpiricaAI/empirica (246 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,647 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.