critique

name	critique
description	Review backend architecture for SOLID violations, coupling issues, and dependency direction problems. Use when evaluating structural design decisions or preparing for refactoring. Triggers: 'review architecture', 'check SOLID', 'critique code', or /axiom:critique. Do NOT use for error handling — use axiom:harden instead.
user-invokable	true
metadata	{"author":"lvlup-sw","version":"0.1.0","category":"assessment","dimensions":["architecture","topology"]}

Critique Skill — Architecture Review

Overview

Architecture review skill covering two quality dimensions:

• DIM-6 (Architecture): SOLID principles adherence, module boundaries, responsibility allocation
• DIM-1 (Topology): Dependency graph health, coupling metrics, layering discipline

Use this skill to evaluate structural design decisions, identify architectural drift, or prepare a codebase for refactoring. It combines deterministic scanning (via axiom:scan) with qualitative agent assessment to produce actionable findings.

Triggers

Positive Triggers

Activate this skill when:

• User says "review architecture" or "architecture review"
• User says "check SOLID" or "SOLID violations"
• User says "critique code" or "critique this module"
• User runs /axiom:critique
• User asks about coupling, dependency direction, or module boundaries
• Preparing for a major refactoring effort

Negative Triggers

Do NOT activate this skill when:

• User wants error handling review — use axiom:harden instead
• User wants test quality review — use axiom:verify instead
• User wants performance review — performance profiling is out of scope for axiom
• User wants a general code review — use axiom:scan for a broad sweep first

Process

Step 1: Load Dimension Definitions

Load the relevant dimension definitions for this review:

• @skills/backend-quality/references/dimensions.md — Read DIM-1 (Topology) and DIM-6 (Architecture) sections for scoring criteria, signal definitions, and severity thresholds.

Step 2: Run Deterministic Scan

Execute axiom:scan targeting Architecture and Topology dimensions specifically:

• Collects measurable signals: file sizes, parameter counts, import depth, circular references
• Establishes a baseline of deterministic findings before qualitative assessment
• Each automated finding sets skill: "scan" and deterministic: true

Step 3: Layer Qualitative Assessment

On top of the scan baseline, perform agent-driven qualitative evaluation across five areas:

3a. SOLID Evaluation

Assess adherence to each SOLID principle. For definitions, violation signals, and severity guidance, see @skills/critique/references/solid-principles.md.

• Single Responsibility Principle (SRP): Does each module/class have one reason to change?
• Open/Closed Principle (OCP): Are modules open for extension but closed for modification?
• Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP): Can subtypes replace their base types without breaking behavior?
• Interface Segregation Principle (ISP): Are interfaces focused, or do clients depend on methods they do not use?
• Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP): Do high-level modules depend on abstractions, not concretions?

3b. Coupling Analysis

Measure and evaluate module coupling:

• Afferent coupling (Ca): How many modules depend on this module?
• Efferent coupling (Ce): How many modules does this module depend on?
• Instability (I = Ce / (Ca + Ce)): Is the module stable (depended-upon) or unstable (depends-on-others)?
• Flag modules with high instability that are also heavily depended-upon (unstable foundation)
• For detailed coupling metrics and patterns, see @skills/critique/references/dependency-patterns.md

3c. Dependency Direction

Evaluate whether dependencies point in the correct direction:

• Dependencies should flow inward: infrastructure depends on domain, not the reverse
• Core/domain modules should never import from infrastructure, framework, or I/O layers
• Check for proper use of dependency inversion — abstractions at boundaries
• See @skills/critique/references/dependency-patterns.md for healthy vs unhealthy patterns

3d. God Object Detection

Identify modules with too many responsibilities:

• Modules handling more than 3 distinct concerns
• Files exceeding complexity thresholds (lines, function count, branching depth)
• Classes or modules that are modified in every feature branch (shotgun surgery indicator)
• Modules that import from many unrelated domains

3e. Readability Patterns

Evaluate code-level readability and structural clarity:

• DRY violations: Duplicated logic across multiple locations that should be extracted
• Deep nesting: Functions with excessive indentation that could use guard clauses / early returns
• Composition over inheritance: Class hierarchies that would be simpler as composed components
• Parameter discipline: Long parameter lists and boolean flags that obscure call-site meaning
• For definitions, violation signals, and refactoring approaches, see @skills/critique/references/readability-patterns.md

3f. Circular Dependency Identification

Detect import cycles between modules:

• Direct circular imports (A imports B, B imports A)
• Transitive cycles (A -> B -> C -> A)
• Barrel-file-mediated cycles (index.ts re-exports creating hidden loops)
• See @skills/critique/references/dependency-patterns.md for detection approach and remediation

Step 4: Output Findings

Format all findings per @skills/backend-quality/references/findings-format.md:

• Each finding includes: dimension, severity, title, evidence, explanation, suggestion (optional), skill, deterministic
• Scan findings use deterministic: true; qualitative findings use deterministic: false
• Grouped by dimension (Architecture, then Topology), sorted by severity within each group
• Include an executive summary with finding counts by severity

Error Handling

• Empty scope: If the target scope contains no analyzable files (e.g., empty directory, only config files), return an informative message: "No backend source files found in the specified scope. Verify the path and ensure it contains TypeScript/JavaScript source files."
• Scope validation: Before analysis, validate that the provided path exists and contains source files. If the path does not exist, report the error immediately rather than producing empty results.
• Partial failures: If the deterministic scan fails on a subset of checks, continue with available results and note which checks were skipped in the output.

References

• @skills/backend-quality/references/dimensions.md — Dimension definitions for DIM-1 and DIM-6
• @skills/backend-quality/references/findings-format.md — Standard output format for findings
• @skills/critique/references/solid-principles.md — SOLID principle definitions, violation signals, severity guide, and detection heuristics
• @skills/critique/references/dependency-patterns.md — Dependency pattern catalog, coupling metrics, circular dependency detection, and layered architecture guidance
• @skills/critique/references/readability-patterns.md — DRY, early returns, composition over inheritance, and parameter discipline