architect

name	architect
description	Architecture Decision Records, System spec, Milestone plan
disable-model-invocation	true

• PERSONA: Read sage/core/agents/architect.persona.md for your mindset.

Architect Workflow

System design for new projects or major redesigns. Elicit, then design, then plan. Never skip steps.

Auto-Pickup

Scan .sage/work/ for architect initiatives. This scan is MANDATORY — check the DISK.

Manifest-first path: If .sage/work/*/manifest.md exists with workflow: architect, run python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/tools/manifest.py" resume (no python3 → read the manifest by hand). Resume at the phase the brief indicates, with the manifest body as judgment context, not orders — the live user outranks recorded decisions, recorded decisions outrank manifest prose, and evidence outranks all of it. Multi-session architect cycles benefit most from the manifest — it preserves the reasoning behind architecture decisions across sessions.

Fallback path: If no manifest.md but artifacts exist, use file-scan:

• No artifacts → Step 2 (elicitation)
• Brief exists, no spec/ADRs → Step 3 (design)
• Spec/ADRs exist, no plan → Step 4 (milestone plan)
• Plan exists → Step 5 (phased build) Create manifest.md from inferred state before proceeding (backfill).

You MUST follow this routing. Do not override it.

Scan .sage/docs/ for existing research, ADRs, or decisions. Read .sage/decisions.md for context. Read handoff field in the most recent artifact if present.

Manifest Lifecycle (architect workflow)

Create manifest.md when brief.md is saved (after elicitation), gate_state: pre-spec. Update at every checkpoint: elicitation gate, design checkpoint, plan checkpoint, each milestone completion — advance gate_state with each. Session end ([N]): Manifest update is MANDATORY — architect cycles span sessions, so handoff guidance is critical. Completion: Set status: complete and gate_state: complete after final milestone — the completion guard requires gate_state to have reached gates-passed first.

gate_state at each checkpoint (machine field — the spec-gate hook reads it):

• Manifest created (brief saved) → pre-spec
• Design / ADRs approved [A] (spec.md status: completed) → spec-approved
• Plan approved [A] → plan-approved
• Implementing a milestone via build-loop → building
• A milestone's quality gates pass → gates-passed
• Final milestone complete → complete

Until gate_state reaches spec-approved, edits to source files are blocked — this is Rule 3 (design before implementation) made mechanical.

Anti-lazy-manifest: Same contract as build workflow — summary must contain judgment, not spec titles.

Step 2: Deep Elicitation

This is the most important step. Understand the full picture before designing anything.

For comprehensive elicitation process, read sage/core/capabilities/elicitation/deep-elicit/SKILL.md.

Three rounds — each produces a VISIBLE ARTIFACT:

Round 1 — Vision: What are you building and why? Who is it for? What does success look like? → Produce: vision summary (saved inline in brief or presented)

Round 2 — Constraints: Technical constraints, timeline, team size, existing systems to integrate with, non-negotiables. → Produce: constraints list (saved inline in brief or presented)

Round 3 — Gaps: What's still unclear? What assumptions are we making? → Produce: gaps analysis (saved inline in brief or presented)

Save combined elicitation to .sage/work/YYYYMMDD-slug/brief.md.

Do NOT proceed to design until all three rounds are complete. Do NOT compress three rounds into one response. Do NOT skip rounds because "the user already explained everything." Each round asks different questions — answers to Round 1 don't satisfy Round 2 or 3.

If Sage has relevant UNDERSTAND skills (research, analysis), recommend them here:

Sage recommends understanding the context before designing:

[1] Start with research — understand user needs first [2] Continue with elicitation round [N] [3] Something else

🔒 ELICITATION GATE:

File check: Does .sage/work/*/brief.md exist with content from all three rounds (vision, constraints, gaps)? If no → complete the missing rounds. Do NOT proceed to design.

Do NOT rationalize skipping:

• "The user described the system clearly" → NOT three-round elicitation
• "I understand the requirements" → your understanding is not a brief file
• "We can figure out details during design" → gaps analysis exists to catch exactly this. Do it now, not during design.

Sage: Elicitation complete. Brief saved.

[A] Approve — continue to architecture design [R] Revise — I want to add or change something [N] New session — type /architect to continue with design

Pick A/R/N, or tell me what to change.

Step 3: Architecture Design

File check: .sage/work/*/brief.md MUST exist before designing. If it doesn't exist, go back to Step 2. No exceptions.

Define: system components, data model, API boundaries, technology choices, deployment architecture, security model. Document key trade-offs and the reasoning behind each decision.

Save architecture decisions to .sage/docs/decision-*.md. Save the full design to .sage/work/YYYYMMDD-slug/spec.md with frontmatter.

🔒 DESIGN CHECKPOINT:

Self-check (observable conditions):

• brief.md exists in .sage/work/ (elicitation was completed)
• spec.md exists in .sage/work/ (design was written)
• At least one decision-*.md exists in .sage/docs/ (ADRs written)
• Trade-offs are named for each major decision If ANY fails → go back and create the missing artifact.

Sage: Architecture design saved. ADRs in .sage/docs/decision-*.md Decision: [key architecture decisions]. (append to .sage/decisions.md)

[A] Approve — continue to planning in this session [R] Revise — here's what needs changing [Q] Question — I want to understand [specific decision] better [N] New session — type /architect to continue with milestone plan

Pick A/R/Q/N, or tell me what to change.

On approval: update spec frontmatter to status: completed. Write handoff field in frontmatter:

handoff: |
  Key decisions: [architecture choices and trade-offs]
  Open questions: [what needs resolution during build]
  Risks: [cross-cutting concerns, performance, migration]
  Next agent should: [specific guidance for milestone planning]

Append architecture decisions to decisions.md (Rule 7).

Step 4: Milestone Plan

File check: .sage/work/*/spec.md MUST exist with status: completed before creating a milestone plan. If it doesn't → go back to Step 3.

Break the build into milestones (not tasks — milestones). Each milestone should be deployable and testable independently. Within each milestone, create a task plan.

Save to .sage/work/YYYYMMDD-slug/plan.md with frontmatter.

🔒 PLAN CHECKPOINT: Sage: Milestone plan saved to .sage/work/YYYYMMDD-slug/plan.md

[A] Approve — start building milestone 1 in this session [R] Revise — adjust the breakdown [N] New session — type /build to start milestone 1

Pick A/R/N, or tell me what to change.

On approval: append plan approach to decisions.md (Rule 7).

Next steps (Zone 3):

Next steps: /build — spec → plan → implement → verify (start milestone 1) /review — independent evaluation of the architecture /reflect — review design decisions before building

Type a command, or describe what you want to do next.

Step 5: Phased Build

Execute milestone by milestone. Each milestone MUST follow the build workflow gates independently:

For each milestone:

1. Create milestone-specific spec if the milestone adds new details beyond the architecture spec
2. Create milestone task plan
3. Implement via build-loop with quality gates per task
4. Verify milestone independently (tests pass, feature works)
5. Present milestone checkpoint

Do NOT batch-implement multiple milestones without checkpoints. Do NOT skip per-milestone verification because "I'll test everything at the end."

At each milestone completion checkpoint: Sage: Milestone [N] complete — [summary] Decision: [what was learned during implementation]. (append to decisions.md)

[C] Continue to milestone [N+1] [R] Revise — adjust before continuing [P] Pause — type /build to continue next session

Re-validate after each milestone: Check architecture assumptions against what implementation revealed. If the architecture needs adjustment, note it in decisions.md and update ADRs before proceeding.

Quality Criteria

Communication style: Systems thinking. Name trade-offs explicitly, discuss failure modes, and explain decisions in terms of constraints and alternatives considered.

Good architecture output:

• Trade-offs are named explicitly — no trade-offs = not deep enough
• Failure modes addressed for every integration point
• System boundaries are clear — what's in scope, what's external
• Each milestone is independently deployable and valuable

Rules

• Elicitation before design. brief.md MUST EXIST before spec.md is created. "I understand the requirements" is NOT a brief file.
• Three elicitation rounds. Do NOT compress or skip rounds.
• Decisions documented with rationale. ADRs in .sage/docs/.
• Checkpoints mandatory. Present [A]/[R] and wait.
• Milestones build independently. Each follows build workflow gates.
• Re-validate after each milestone. Architecture assumptions may be wrong — implementation reveals truth.

Failure Modes

• Agent skips elicitation: "I already understand the system." The elicitation gate blocks this — brief.md must exist.
• Agent compresses rounds: One response covering all three rounds misses the back-and-forth that catches gaps. Rounds must be sequential with user input between them.
• Agent batch-implements milestones: "I'll build all three milestones in one pass." Each milestone needs its own checkpoint.
• Architecture assumptions survive implementation: The re-validate step after each milestone catches stale assumptions.