Skip to main content Accueil Créateurs adolfoaranaes12 bmad-enhanced create-architecture
create-architecture Generate comprehensive system architecture documents from requirements, supporting Frontend, Backend, and Fullstack projects with scale-adaptive depth and Architecture Decision Records. Use when translating requirements (PRD/epic) into technical architecture for new projects or major features.
Aller à l'installation Skills Marketplace Découvrez et explorez les compétences IA créées par la communauté.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Afficher les détails du prompt Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
npx skills add https://github.com/adolfoaranaes12/BMAD-ENHANCED --skill create-architectureLa commande reste sur une seule ligne. Faites défiler horizontalement pour la vérifier avant de la copier.
Vous préférez une copie locale ? Téléchargez les fichiers actuellement disponibles dans SkillsMP.
Télécharger Zip Téléchargement... Plus depuis ce dépôt Comprehensive brownfield architecture analysis for existing codebases. Discovers structure, identifies patterns, assesses quality, calculates production readiness, and provides actionable recommendations. Use when analyzing existing codebases to understand architecture, assess quality, or prepare for modernization.
Systematically consume QA quality gate outputs and apply prioritized fixes for high-severity issues, NFR failures, and test coverage gaps. Use when quality review identifies issues requiring remediation.
Peer review architecture for quality, risks, and optimization opportunities. Analyzes scalability bottlenecks, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, technology fit, and provides prioritized recommendations. Use when reviewing proposed architecture documents for quality assurance, risk identification, or architectural decision validation.
Métiers associés SOC
Basé sur la classification professionnelle SOC
Explorateur de fichiers
14 fichiers name create-architecture description Generate comprehensive system architecture documents from requirements, supporting Frontend, Backend, and Fullstack projects with scale-adaptive depth and Architecture Decision Records. Use when translating requirements (PRD/epic) into technical architecture for new projects or major features. acceptance [{"architecture_created":"Architecture document created at docs/architecture.md"},{"all_sections_present":"All required sections present for project type"},{"tech_stack_justified":"Technology stack decisions documented with justification"},{"adrs_created":"At least 3 Architecture Decision Records created"},{"nfrs_addressed":"Non-functional requirements addressed in architecture"}] inputs {"requirements_file":{"type":"string","required":true,"description":"Path to PRD or requirements document"},"project_type":{"type":"string","required":false,"description":"frontend | backend | fullstack (auto-detected if not provided)"},"complexity":{"type":"string","required":false,"description":"simple | medium | complex (auto-calculated if not provided)"},"existing_architecture":{"type":"string","required":false,"description":"Path to existing architecture (for brownfield projects)"}} outputs {"architecture_file":{"type":"string","description":"Path to created architecture document"},"project_type":{"type":"string","description":"Detected or specified project type"},"complexity_score":{"type":"number","description":"Calculated complexity score (0-100)"},"adrs_created":{"type":"number","description":"Number of ADRs created"},"sections_included":{"type":"array","description":"List of architecture sections included"}} telemetry {"emit":"skill.create-architecture.completed","track":["project_type","complexity_score","adrs_created","duration_ms","tech_stack_size"]}
Create Architecture
Purpose
Generate comprehensive, production-ready system architecture documents from requirements. Supports Frontend, Backend, and Fullstack projects with scale-adaptive depth, proven architectural patterns, and Architecture Decision Records (ADRs).
Core Principles:
Multi-domain support: Frontend, Backend, Fullstack architecturesScale-adaptive: Adjusts detail based on project complexityPattern-driven: Leverages proven architectural patterns catalogDecision-focused: Documents key decisions as ADRsTechnology-agnostic: Considers multiple options, recommends best fit
Prerequisites
Requirements document exists (PRD, epic, or user stories)
Non-functional requirements (NFRs) defined or inferable
Target user scale and data volume known or estimable
Project constraints documented (team, timeline, budget)
Workflow
1. Load and Analyze Requirements
Action: Read requirements document using bmad-commands
Execute:
python .claude/skills/bmad-commands/scripts/read_file.py \
--path {requirements_file} \
--output json
Extract from requirements:
Functional requirements (features, capabilities)
Non-functional requirements (performance, security, scalability)
Business goals and constraints
Technical constraints (technologies, platforms)
User scale estimates
Data volume estimates
Integration requirements
If brownfield: Also load existing architecture for context.
See: references/requirements-analysis-guide.md for extraction techniques
2. Detect Project Type
Analyze requirements to determine domain:
Frontend-only indicators:
UI/UX requirements are dominant
No backend/API requirements mentioned
Focus on components, state, routing, styling
Technologies: React, Vue, Angular, Svelte
Backend-only indicators:
API/service requirements dominant
No UI requirements mentioned
Focus on business logic, data processing, integrations
Technologies: Node.js, Python, Java, Go, Rust
Both frontend and backend requirements
End-to-end user journeys described
Integration between UI and services
Technologies span both domains
Default: If unclear, select Fullstack (most comprehensive)
See: references/project-type-patterns.md for detailed detection criteria
3. Assess Complexity Calculate complexity score based on weighted factors:
Factor Weight Scoring User scale 25% <1K=10, 1K-10K=30, 10K-100K=60, >100K=90 Data volume 20% <10GB=10, 10GB-1TB=40, >1TB=80 Integration points 20% 0-2=10, 3-5=40, 6-10=70, >10=90 Performance reqs 15% None=0, Standard=30, Strict=70 Security reqs 10% Basic=10, Standard=40, Advanced=80 Deployment 10% Single=10, Multi-region=50, Global=80
Score = (scale × 0.25) + (data × 0.20) + (integrations × 0.20) +
(perf × 0.15) + (security × 0.10) + (deploy × 0.10)
0-30: Simple (single-tier, standard patterns)31-60: Medium (multi-tier, moderate patterns)61-100: Complex (distributed, advanced patterns) This determines: Architecture depth, pattern selection, ADR count
See: references/complexity-assessment.md for detailed scoring guide
4. Select Architectural Patterns Based on project type and complexity, select patterns:
Component architecture (atomic design, compound components)
State management (Redux, Zustand, Context, Recoil)
Routing strategies (file-based, declarative, nested)
Styling approach (CSS-in-JS, Tailwind, CSS Modules)
Data fetching (React Query, SWR, Apollo)
API design (REST, GraphQL, tRPC, gRPC)
Service architecture (monolith, microservices, modular monolith)
Data modeling (relational, document, event-sourced)
Integration patterns (message queues, event buses, webhooks)
Caching strategies (Redis, Memcached, CDN)
Framework selection (Next.js, Remix, SvelteKit, Nuxt)
Monorepo structure (Turborepo, Nx, Lerna)
API layers (BFF, API Gateway, tRPC)
Deployment (Vercel, Netlify, AWS, Docker/K8s)
Authentication (NextAuth, Passport, Auth0, Clerk)
See: references/patterns-catalog.md for complete pattern library
5. Evaluate Technology Stack For each architectural component, evaluate options:
Requirements fit (does it meet functional/NFRs?)
Team expertise (can team use this effectively?)
Community support (strong ecosystem?)
Performance (meets requirements?)
Scalability (scales with growth?)
Cost (licensing/infrastructure costs?)
Maintenance (long-term burden?)
Migration path (can we change later?)
Identify requirements for component
Generate 3-5 alternatives
Evaluate against criteria
Select best fit
Document in ADR
See: references/technology-decision-framework.md for evaluation matrices
6. Generate Architecture Document Create comprehensive architecture at docs/architecture.md:
Structure (adapt based on project type):
# [Project Name] Architecture
## 1. System Overview
[High-level description, context, goals]
## 2. Architecture Diagrams
[C4 context, container, component diagrams]
## 3. Frontend Architecture (if applicable)
[Component design, state management, routing, styling, build]
## 4. Backend Architecture (if applicable)
[API design, services, data layer, business logic, integrations]
## 5. Fullstack Integration (if applicable)
[End-to-end flows, API contracts, auth, deployment]
## 6. Data Architecture
[Data models, relationships, migrations, caching]
## 7. Technology Stack
[All technologies with justifications]
## 8. Deployment Architecture
[Infrastructure, environments, CI/CD, monitoring]
## 9. Security Architecture
[Authentication, authorization, data protection, compliance]
## 10. Performance Architecture
[Caching, optimization, CDN, load balancing]
## 11. Scalability Plan
[Horizontal/vertical scaling, bottlenecks, growth plan]
## 12. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
[Key decisions with context, options considered, rationale]
## 13. Migration Strategy (brownfield only)
[Current state, target state, migration path, risks]
## 14. Open Questions & Risks
[Unknowns, risks, mitigation strategies]
Simple: Focus on sections 1, 3-7, 12 (10-15 pages)Medium: Include sections 1-12 (15-25 pages)Complex: All sections with deep analysis (25-40 pages) See: references/templates.md for section templates
7. Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) For each significant decision, create ADR:
# ADR-XXX: [Decision Title]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded
## Context
[Problem and constraints]
## Decision
[What we decided]
## Alternatives Considered
1. Option A: [pros/cons]
2. Option B: [pros/cons]
3. Option C: [pros/cons]
## Rationale
[Why this option]
## Consequences
[Positive and negative impacts]
## Related Decisions
[Links to other ADRs]
Simple architecture: 3-5 ADRs
Medium architecture: 5-10 ADRs
Complex architecture: 10-15 ADRs
Primary technology stack selection
Database choice
API design approach
State management strategy
Authentication mechanism
Deployment platform
Monitoring and observability approach
See: references/adr-examples.md for ADR examples
8. Address Non-Functional Requirements Ensure architecture addresses all NFRs:
Response time targets (p50, p95, p99)
Throughput requirements (req/sec)
Optimization strategies (caching, CDN, lazy loading)
User growth projections
Data growth projections
Horizontal scaling strategy
Bottleneck identification
Authentication and authorization
Data encryption (at rest, in transit)
Input validation and sanitization
Compliance requirements (GDPR, HIPAA, etc.)
Availability targets (99%, 99.9%, 99.99%)
Fault tolerance strategies
Disaster recovery plan
Backup and restore procedures
Code organization principles
Testing strategy
Documentation standards
Technical debt management
See: references/nfr-architecture-mapping.md for NFR checklist
9. Generate Supplementary Artifacts (Optional) If requested or beneficial:
python .claude/skills/bmad-commands/scripts/generate_architecture_diagram.py \
--architecture docs/architecture.md \
--type c4-context \
--output docs/diagrams/
Technology Analysis Report:
python .claude/skills/bmad-commands/scripts/analyze_tech_stack.py \
--architecture docs/architecture.md \
--output json
Extract ADRs to separate files:
python .claude/skills/bmad-commands/scripts/extract_adrs.py \
--architecture docs/architecture.md \
--output docs/adrs/
10. Validate Completeness Self-validate before marking complete:
Check all required sections present:
✅ System Overview
✅ Architecture appropriate for project type
✅ Technology Stack documented
✅ NFRs addressed
✅ At least 3 ADRs created
✅ Security considerations included
✅ Scalability plan defined
✅ All technology choices justified
✅ Alternatives considered
✅ Risks identified
✅ No critical gaps
If validation fails: Address gaps before completion.
Common Scenarios
Scenario 1: Greenfield Frontend Application Input: React dashboard requirements
Output: Frontend-only architecture with component design, state (Zustand), routing (React Router), styling (Tailwind), build (Vite)
Scenario 2: Backend API Service Input: REST API requirements for mobile app
Output: Backend-only architecture with Express.js, PostgreSQL, Prisma, Redis caching, JWT auth
Scenario 3: Fullstack E-commerce Platform Input: Comprehensive e-commerce requirements
Output: Fullstack architecture with Next.js, tRPC, PostgreSQL, Stripe integration, Vercel deployment
Scenario 4: Brownfield System Modernization Input: Legacy monolith + modernization requirements
Output: Migration architecture with incremental microservices extraction, API gateway, strangler fig pattern
See: references/example-architectures.md for complete examples
Success Criteria An architecture is complete and ready for implementation when:
Documentation Completeness
✅ Architecture document created at docs/architecture.md
✅ All required sections present for project type:
System Overview & Context
Technology Stack (complete and justified)
Deployment Architecture
Security Architecture
Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
Project-specific sections (Frontend/Backend/Fullstack)
✅ Architecture diagrams included (minimum 1, recommended 2-3)
✅ Technology stack fully documented with versions
Decision Quality
✅ Minimum ADR count met:
Simple (0-30): ≥3 ADRs
Medium (31-60): ≥5 ADRs
Complex (61-100): ≥10 ADRs
✅ Each ADR includes:
Context and problem statement
Decision made
Alternatives considered (minimum 2)
Rationale with data/benchmarks
Consequences (positive and negative)
✅ Technology choices justified with alternatives
NFR Coverage
✅ All Non-Functional Requirements addressed:
Performance: Targets specified (e.g., p95 <500ms)
Scalability: Growth projections and scaling plan
Security: Auth, authorization, encryption, compliance
Reliability: Availability target, redundancy, failover
Maintainability: Testing strategy, code organization
✅ NFRs mapped to concrete architecture decisions
Quality Gates
✅ No critical gaps or missing sections
✅ No contradictory decisions
✅ Security considerations documented
✅ Scalability approach defined
✅ Deployment strategy clear
✅ Cost implications considered
Validation Ready
✅ Architecture can be validated with validate-architecture skill
✅ Expected validation score ≥70
✅ Ready for team review
✅ Implementation-ready (developers can start coding)
[ ] Architecture document created
[ ] All required sections present
[ ] Minimum ADR count met
[ ] Technologies justified
[ ] NFRs addressed
[ ] Diagrams included
[ ] Security documented
[ ] Deployment defined
[ ] No critical gaps
[ ] Validation score ≥70
Best Practices
Start with requirements - Architecture follows requirements, not the reverseConsider alternatives - Evaluate 3-5 options for major decisionsDocument decisions - Every significant choice becomes an ADRThink long-term - Consider maintenance, scaling, team growthBe pragmatic - Choose appropriate tools, not trendy onesAddress NFRs explicitly - Don't assume performance/securityPlan for failure - Include error handling, monitoring, resilienceKeep it readable - Architecture doc is for humans, not just completeness
Reference Files
references/requirements-analysis-guide.md - Requirement extraction techniquesreferences/project-type-patterns.md - Project type detection criteriareferences/complexity-assessment.md - Detailed complexity scoringreferences/patterns-catalog.md - Complete architectural patterns libraryreferences/technology-decision-framework.md - Tech evaluation matricesreferences/templates.md - Architecture document templatesreferences/adr-examples.md - ADR examples by domainreferences/nfr-architecture-mapping.md - NFR to architecture mappingreferences/example-architectures.md - Complete architecture examples
When to Escalate
Requirements are insufficient or contradictory
Conflicting NFRs (e.g., cost vs. performance)
Missing critical information (user scale, data volume unknown)
Highly complex system (score >80) requires expert input
Compliance requirements (HIPAA, PCI-DSS, SOC2) need legal review
Technology choices have significant business impact
Budget constraints eliminate viable options
Part of BMAD Enhanced Planning Suite
