Skip to main content

ix-architecture

Analyze system design — structure, coupling, code smells, and high-risk hotspots. Purely graph-based, no code reads.

Informations de source

Dépôt
ix-infrastructure/ix-openclaw-plugin
Dernière activité de la source
4 juin 2026 à 06:40
Langue détectée de SKILL.md
anglais
Étoiles
1
Forks
0

Options d'installation

Le prompt qui vérifie d'abord la source est sélectionné par défaut. Vous pouvez passer à une commande directe ou télécharger une copie locale.

Vérifiez les fichiers source

Lisez SKILL.md et les fichiers associés affichés par SkillsMP avant de décider de l'installer.

Affichage de SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
ix-architecture
description
Analyze system design — structure, coupling, code smells, and high-risk hotspots. Purely graph-based, no code reads.
metadata
{"openclaw":{"requires":{"bins":"[Truncated]"}}}
Run `command -v ix` to verify ix is on PATH. Never use tilde paths (`~/...`) or absolute paths — always invoke `ix` directly via PATH. If not found, stop and say so — this skill requires a graph. ## Goal Answer: *how healthy is this system's design, where are the weak boundaries, and what should be improved?* Never reads source code — structural analysis only. ## Phase 1 — Structure (always) Run in parallel: ```bash timeout 60s ix subsystems --format llm timeout 60s ix subsystems --list --format llm ``` If `$ARGUMENTS` is provided, also run: ```bash timeout 60s ix subsystems $ARGUMENTS --explain timeout 60s ix subsystems $ARGUMENTS --format llm ``` Extract: - Region hierarchy (systems → subsystems → modules) - Cohesion scores per region (higher = more self-contained) - External coupling per region (lower = better) - `crosscut_score` > 0.1 → cross-cutting concern (design smell) - `confidence` < 0.6 → fuzzy boundary (uncertain region) ## Phase 2 — Smells ```bash timeout 60s ix smells --format llm ``` If `$ARGUMENTS` scopes to a path: ```bash timeout 60s ix smells --path $ARGUMENTS --format llm ``` Classify each finding: `orphan` / `god-module` / `weak-component`. ## Phase 3 — Hotspots (only if smells are found or coupling is high) Run only if Phase 1 or 2 revealed significant issues: ```bash timeout 60s ix rank --by dependents --kind class --top 10 --exclude-path test --format llm timeout 60s ix rank --by dependents --kind function --top 10 --exclude-path test --format llm ``` Correlate: are the most-depended-on entities also in poorly-bounded subsystems? These are the highest-risk components. ## Output ``` ## Architecture Analysis ### System Structure [Region hierarchy with file counts. Flag: low-confidence boundaries, high-coupling regions, cross-cutting modules.] ### Health Scores | Region | Cohesion | Ext. Coupling | Boundary Ratio | Flag | |--------|----------|---------------|----------------|------| | [name] | [0-1] | [0-1] | [ratio] | [⚠ if bad] | ### Code Smells **High severity:** - [smell type] in [file/module] — [why it matters] **Medium severity:** - ... ### Hotspots [Top components where structural debt + centrality combine — highest risk for changes] ### Improvement Areas 1. [specific issue] — [concrete suggestion] 2. ... ### What's healthy [Briefly note well-structured areas — not everything is a problem] ``` **Evidence:** All claims must cite graph data (cohesion scores, smell counts, rank positions). No speculative design advice without structural evidence.
Voir sur GitHub