architect
Sketch types, signatures, and module structure before code, then stay in the loop while implementation fills in.
Skill by plicjo
Install
Works with Claude Code, Claude apps, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, VS Code, OpenCode, Goose, Windsurf. Read the repository before you give any tool access to your data.
npx agentmarket install skill/plicjo-architect
Asks which of your tools to add it to (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, Claude Desktop) and shows the change first. See https://agentmart.dev/cli.
Get the weekly diff
The weekly diff: one email a week with new agent tools, notable updates and grade changes, plus security alerts for tools you follow. Double opt-in, one-click unsubscribe.
About
Use cases: design
Reviews
Write a reviewNo reviews yet. Installed it? Reviews come from verified installers only. How reviews work
Permissions
What this skill can do and what it asks for, from its SKILL.md. Checked Oct 25, 2026.
- Tools
- No tools found
- Secrets
- None asked for
- Install scripts
- None found
Network hosts it talks to 1
codeload.github.com· found in install command
Files it touches
~/.claude/skills/architect
What's inside
- Skill name
architect- Description
- Sketch types, signatures, and module structure before code, then stay in the loop while implementation fills in. Use for /architect, 'architect this', 'design this', or non-trivial work where jumping to code would lock in the wrong shape.
- License
- MIT
- Instructions
- 79 lines in SKILL.md · view on GitHub
Files (4)
- SKILL.md
- design-red-flags.md · references/
- rationale-template.md · references/
- runner-prompt.md · references/
SKILL.md (first lines)
# Architect Sketch types, function signatures, class shapes, and module boundaries with `not implemented` bodies and pseudocode. Synthesize across multiple model perspectives, then fill in code against the chosen sketch. ## Start Open a todolist with one entry per phase before starting. 1. Ground 2. Sketch 3. Agree 4. Implement 5. Scrap ## Phase A: Ground the problem Build a real mental model of every system the new code touches. Run the **how** skill over the relevant subsystems. Naming a file isn't grounding. Produce the architectural explanation `how` prescribes. If the design redefines ownership or layering, also run the **why** skill on the existing shape so the rationale becomes a constraint, not a guess. Skip Phase A only when the work is genuinely greenfield with no surrounding system to integrate. ## Phase B: Sketch Run the **arena** skill with the design-sketch task and the Phase A grounding artifacts. Pass `references/runner-prompt.md` as each runner's prompt. Run one runner on each of `factory-reviewer-a`, `factory-reviewer-b` and `factory-reviewer-c`. **Fable seat (opt-in).** Seat A is `factory-reviewer-a`. When the environment sets `FACTORY_FABLE_SEAT=1`, spawn `factory-reviewer-fable` with the same brief in place of `factory-reviewer-a`. If it fails with "requires usage credits", respawn on `factory-reviewer-a` and use it for seat A for the rest of the session. Extra seats that reuse seat A go to `factory-reviewer-a`, never to the Fable agent. Spawn more seats by reusing those agents when the design space is wide. **Grok runner (opt-in).** When the environment sets `FACTORY_GROK_SEAT=1`, add one more runner on `factory-reviewer-grok`, on top of seats A, B and C, not in place of one. Grok has no tools and reads only the files its brief names. Write the Phase A grounding to a file, and give the brief the repository directory, the grounding file and the smallest set of source files the design must fit. Ask for the candidate package in the reply, ending with a `VERDICT:` line that names its confidence in the shape. Save the reply to that runner's output path yourself. Grok cannot check names or signatures against code it was not sent, so check them against the repo before its candidate becomes a base. If the seat reports itself unavailable, continue with three runners and note the dropout. Unless the Grok runner is active, seats A and B run the same model at the same effort and only seat C differs, by model, so weight a concrete structural objection over a majority opinion. Design it twice. Require at least two structurally distinct candidates before synthesis, even when the first looks sufficient. This is the **exhaust-the-design-space** principle skill made concrete. Whole-shape alternatives, not point fixes inside one shape. Screen every candidate against [`references/design-red-flags.md`](references/design-red-flags.md) before synthesis. Assume the next contributor is an agent that sees only the files it opened, copies the nearest example, and takes the shortest path that compiles. Prefer the design where a change that looks right from one file is right for the whole repo. Compare viable candidates on interface depth. Prefer the design that hides more complexity behind a smaller, simpler public surface. A rich interface can keep call chains short by concentrating capability instead of scattering it across layers. Arena returns one synthesized design package. Its synthesis decision fills the rationale's "Synthesis decision" section. ## Phase C: Agree (opt-in) Default: proceed directly to implementation with the synthesized design. No human checkpoint. Opt in to a checkpoint when the invoker explicitly asks: "/architect with checkpoint," "stop and show me before implementing," or similar. Then surface the synthesized design and pause for sign-off. The synthesis can ship as its own commit either way, as the "scaffold first" mode of the **foundational-thinking** principle skill. Planned and scoped breakage during fill-in is fine, per the **outcome-oriented-execution** principle skill. For adversarial pressure on the design before implementing, run the **interrogate** skill on the synthesized sketch. If the human pushes back on the shape (in a checkpoint or after the fact), treat that as Phase A evidence. Re-ground and re-run Phase B before writing more code. ## Phase D: Implement against the sketch Replace `not implemented` bodies with code, pseudocode with logic. The synthesized sketch is the contract. Deviations from it are signal to surface, not friction to absorb silently. If a function needs a parameter the sketch didn't anticipate, ask whether the sketch was wrong, the requirement was missed, or the implementation is overreaching. ## Phase E: Scrap when the architecture is wrong If implementation keeps producing friction the sketch can't absorb, throw the sketch out. Don't bolt fixes onto a wrong design, per the **redesign-from-first-principles** and **fix-root-causes** principle skills. The signal is a *pattern*, not single instances. Tells: - The same shape of workaround appearing repeatedly across unrelated code. - Multiple unrelated edge cases that all need special-case branches. - Types that need escape hatches (`any`, casts, optional fields always set in practice) to compile. - The "we need a lock" reflex when the sketch said the state wasn't shared. - Callers having to know the abstraction's internal rules to use it. - Two or more independent Phase D deviations of the same shape across the implementation. Use judgment. A few edge cases don't condemn an architecture. Some problems are legitimately complex. Complexity in the data is not complexity in the design. When you scrap: 1. Re-run the **how** skill over what's been built. 2. Redesign as if the new constraints had been day-one assumptions, per redesign-from-first-principles. 3. Subtract before adding, per the **subtract-before-you-add** principle skill. The new sketch should be smaller than the old one before it grows. 4. Return to Phase B and re-run arena. ## Outputs The caller's usage is written first and the type sketch derived from it. One file with new types and signatures for small changes. Module map plus type definitions for larger work. The rationale ships alongside, shaped per `references/rationale-template.md`, including the usage sketch and the synthesis decision.
From plicjo/factory, MIT.
More from plicjo/factory
- 0.589score
factory-mode
plicjo
poteto's agent style for concise, detailed responses, deliberate subagents, unslopped prose, simple code, and verified work.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.579score
deslop
plicjo
Remove AI-generated code slop from the branch's diff and clean up code style.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
interrogate
plicjo
Use for "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart".
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
how
plicjo
Use for "how does X work", code walkthroughs before changing something, and placement / ownership / layering questions ("where should this live", "which…
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
create-verification-skill
plicjo
Generate a project-local verification skill that drives your app the way a user does — any language, framework, or platform.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
arena
plicjo
Spawn N parallel candidates at the same task, pick a base, graft the strongest parts of the losers into it.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.556score
no-comments
plicjo
Spawn Comment Sicko, fix accepted findings, and offer encodings for claimed constraints.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9
Signals
- Stars
- 1
- Forks
- 0
- Open issues
- 0
- Last commit (this folder)
- Oct 21, 2026 (8 days ago)
- Last release
- Oct 13, 2026 (16 days ago)
From GitHub (fetched Oct 24, 2026).
Details
- License
- MIT
- Repository
- github.com/plicjo/factory
- First seen
- Oct 24, 2026
- Last checked
- Oct 24, 2026
- Source
- GitHubgithub-graphql
More from plicjo
- 0.589score
factory-mode
plicjo
poteto's agent style for concise, detailed responses, deliberate subagents, unslopped prose, simple code, and verified work.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.579score
deslop
plicjo
Remove AI-generated code slop from the branch's diff and clean up code style.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
interrogate
plicjo
Use for "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart".
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
how
plicjo
Use for "how does X work", code walkthroughs before changing something, and placement / ownership / layering questions ("where should this live", "which…
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.564score
create-verification-skill
plicjo
Generate a project-local verification skill that drives your app the way a user does — any language, framework, or platform.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
arena
plicjo
Spawn N parallel candidates at the same task, pick a base, graft the strongest parts of the losers into it.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9
Cite this page
architect skill. Agent Mart. https://agentmart.dev/skills/plicjo-architect (last updated 2026-10-24)