sysdesign-impl

name	sysdesign-impl
description	Scaffold a minimum-viable implementation of a designed system. Activated when the user is ready to write code. Reads sdd.md (or falls back to mock-interview.md), determines the smallest component subset that lets the design's NFRs be testable (NOT a full production build — single-region, in-memory or single-container infra, no CDN, no multi-region), asks the user for the language/framework stack (default Spring Boot + PostgreSQL + Kafka per project's existing skill set), then scaffolds <topic>/source/ with per-service directories, a docker-compose.yml that brings everything up locally, and test-results/ scaffolding for functional / load / failure tests. The point is verification of design assumptions, not production.
triggers	["구현하자","구현해보자","구현 시작","코드 만들어","코드 짜보자","최소 구현","MVI 만들","mvi 만들","minimum viable implementation","implementation 시작","implementation 만들","소스 스캐폴드","스캐폴딩 해줘","scaffold","프로토타입 만들","prototype 만들","최소 운영","동작 가능한 최소"]
allowed-tools	Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep, Bash

sysdesign-impl — Phase 6 (Minimum-Viable Implementation)

You are scaffolding the smallest runnable system that lets the user verify design decisions from the SDD. Not production. Not 100M-DAU-ready. Just enough to:

1. Run end-to-end via docker-compose up
2. Run functional tests (API behaves as designed)
3. Run small-scale load tests (NFR shape verifiable, even if absolute numbers smaller)
4. Inject one or two failure scenarios

Operating procedure

Step 0. Identify active topic

TOPIC=$(cat .omc/state/active-sysdesign-topic.txt 2>/dev/null)

If empty → ask user. Confirm: "현재 활성: <TOPIC>. 이 토픽 구현 스캐폴딩한다."

Step 1. Read the design

Try in order:

1. <TOPIC>/System-Design-Document/sdd.md — preferred
2. <TOPIC>/System-Design-Document/mock-interview.md — fallback (warn user: "SDD 없이 mock-interview만 보고 진행. ADR / Risk / Rollout 정보 없음. 계속 가도 돼?")
3. Neither → abort: "디자인 문서 없음. sysdesign-design 먼저."

Step 2. Decide MVI subset

This is the hardest step. The full design has many components; the MVI has only what's needed to test the design's most consequential decisions.

Use this framework to decide what's IN vs OUT:

Component class	IN MVI	OUT MVI
Application services	ALL services that own a distinct domain (per design)	none
Database	1 instance of the chosen engine (no replicas)	Replication, sharding, multi-master
Cache	1 Redis (or Memcached) instance — only if cache is a load-bearing decision in the design	Cache cluster, multi-tier, CDN
Message queue	1 Kafka broker (or RabbitMQ) — only if async/event-driven was a load-bearing decision	Multi-broker cluster, multi-region replication
Load balancer	nginx in compose (or skip — clients hit services directly for tests)	HA LB pair, GeoDNS
API Gateway	Skip unless explicitly tested	(always)
CDN	Skip — not testable in compose	(always)
Multi-region	Skip — single-region	(always)
Service discovery	Skip if ≤3 services (compose hostnames suffice)	ZooKeeper / Consul / etcd
Auth/SSO	Stub (hardcoded token) — unless the SDD explicitly designs auth	Production OAuth/OIDC
Observability	docker-compose include Prometheus + Grafana only if NFR includes specific metric SLOs	Full APM, distributed tracing
Background jobs	1 worker per job type	Auto-scaling, priority queues

Concrete examples (drawn from sysdesign-question-bank/problems/):

• chat-system MVI: 2 chat servers (WebSocket) + 1 Kafka + 1 Cassandra (or Postgres for simplicity) + nginx. Skip: presence pub/sub fan-out, push notifications, ZooKeeper.
• url-shortener MVI: 1 web service + 1 Postgres + 1 Redis. Skip: replicas, CDN, analytics pipeline.
• news-feed MVI: 1 post service + 1 fan-out worker + 1 feed service + 1 Postgres + 1 Redis + 1 Kafka. Skip: graph DB for friends (use Postgres table), CDN for media.
• rate-limiter MVI: 1 API gateway service + 1 Redis. Skip: distributed Redis, multi-region.

Propose the MVI to user as a table:

"SDD에서 설계한 컴포넌트 중 MVI에는 다음만 포함:

Component	In MVI?	Why / Why not
chat-server-A, chat-server-B	✓	핵심 — WebSocket + 메시지 라우팅 검증
Kafka (1 broker)	✓	메시지 큐 결정 검증 (async fan-out)
Cassandra	✓ → Postgres로 대체 추천	단일 노드 운영 단순화. Cassandra의 wide-row 특성 검증이 핵심 NFR이면 그대로 가도 됨
알림 서비스	✗	offline 푸시는 별도 플로우 — MVI 외
ZooKeeper	✗	2개 서버는 compose 호스트명으로 충분

이대로 가도 돼? 추가/제외할 거 있어?"

Step 3. Stack selection

Default stack (per .claude/CLAUDE.md skills bias toward Spring Boot):

• Language/framework: Spring Boot 3 / Java 21
• DB: PostgreSQL (or Cassandra/MongoDB if SDD demands it)
• Cache: Redis
• Queue: Kafka
• Container: docker-compose
• Build: Gradle
• Test: JUnit 5 + Testcontainers + k6 (load) + Toxiproxy (failure injection)

Ask user:

"Stack 기본은 Spring Boot 3 / Postgres / Redis / Kafka / docker-compose / k6. 바꿀 거 있어? (Node, Go, Python 가능)"

User may pick stack — adjust scaffolding accordingly. Do not add stack-specific scaffolding before user confirms.

Step 4. Scaffold

For each IN-MVI service, create <TOPIC>/source/<service-name>/:

<TOPIC>/source/<service-name>/
├── build.gradle (or package.json / go.mod / pyproject.toml)
├── Dockerfile
├── src/main/...   (entrypoint + minimum API per SDD)
└── src/test/...   (1 unit test, 1 integration test stub)

If existing .claude/skills/new-feature or domain-modeling / layer-architecture skills apply (Spring Boot + DDD + TDD), follow their conventions. Otherwise apply project-wide conventions from .claude/CLAUDE.md:

• DDD layered: api → application → domain → infra
• TDD: write 1 failing test first (RED), then implement to GREEN
• Domain layer infra-free
• per-topic isolation (no shared code with other topics)
• AI 생성 티 금지 (no TODO comments / boilerplate explanation)

Create <TOPIC>/source/docker-compose.yml:

version: "3.9"
services:
  service-a:
    build: ./service-a
    ports: ["8080:8080"]
    depends_on: [postgres, kafka]
  postgres:
    image: postgres:16
    environment:
      POSTGRES_DB: <topic>
      POSTGRES_PASSWORD: dev
    ports: ["5432:5432"]
  kafka:
    image: confluentinc/cp-kafka:latest
    # (minimal single-node config — KRaft mode)
  # ...

Create <TOPIC>/test-results/ scaffolding:

<TOPIC>/test-results/
├── functional-test.md (template: API checks)
├── load-test.md (template: k6 script + result summary)
├── failure-test.md (template: chaos scenarios)
└── reports/

Step 5. NFR test mapping

For each NFR in SDD §9, generate a corresponding test stub. Examples:

NFR	Test type	Stub
p99 < 100ms	Load test (k6)	k6 run --vus 100 --duration 60s scripts/p99.js + assertion p(99) < 100
99.99% availability	Failure test	Toxiproxy: kill DB for 30s, verify circuit breaker engages, no 5xx storm
12K RPS sustained	Load test	k6 ramp to 12000 RPS for 5 min
Fan-out delivery <1s	Functional test	Post message, assert all subscribers receive within 1s

Write these as test scripts, not just docs. Place under <TOPIC>/source/<service>/load-tests/ or <TOPIC>/test-results/scripts/.

Step 6. Smoke run + report

cd "$TOPIC/source"
docker-compose up -d --build
sleep 10  # wait for services
docker-compose ps
# basic health check
curl -fsS http://localhost:8080/healthz || echo "service not healthy yet"
docker-compose down

Report to user:

"✓ MVI 스캐폴딩 완료.

• <TOPIC>/source/ — {N개 서비스} + docker-compose.yml
• <TOPIC>/test-results/ — functional / load / failure 템플릿
• 스모크 결과: 모든 서비스 up, /healthz 200 OK

다음 단계 (수동):

1. cd <TOPIC>/source && docker-compose up
2. functional 테스트 실행
3. k6 load 테스트 — NFR 충족 검증
4. 결과 → <TOPIC>/test-results/{type}.md 에 기록
5. SDD 'Findings vs Assumptions' 섹션 업데이트 (실측이 가정과 다른 부분)"

Step 7. Mark topic as "shipped"

source/ 에 실제 파일이 들어갔으니 토픽이 shipped 상태로 자동 분류됩니다 (cleanup-logs.mjs가 source/ 비어있는지로 shipped 판정). conversation-log/ 는 다음 SessionStart부터 shipped 보존 정책(3일)이 적용됩니다.

토픽을 다른 토픽으로 갈아탈 준비가 됐다면 .omc/state/active-sysdesign-topic.txt 는 사용자가 새 sysdesign-design 호출하면 자동 덮어써집니다 — 별도 액션 불필요.

Hard rules

Rule	Why
MVI는 production이 아님. CDN / multi-region / replica / HA cluster는 자동 OUT.	스코프 폭주 방지. 검증 가능한 최소가 목적.
Stack은 사용자 확인 후에만 스캐폴딩 시작.	Default 가정으로 코드 수백 줄 쓰면 손실.
모든 NFR은 대응되는 test stub이 있어야 함. NFR 검증 못 하면 MVI 가치 없음.	SDD ↔ test traceability.
<topic>/source/ 외 다른 곳 (예: 다른 토픽 dir, .claude/) 절대 안 건드림.	per-topic isolation.
docker-compose가 떠야만 "스캐폴딩 완료". 안 뜨면 in_progress.	"동작 가능한 최소" 정의 충족.
기존 sysdesign-* 외 스킬 (domain-modeling / layer-architecture / tdd-patterns / event-driven / saga-pattern)이 stack에 맞으면 그 컨벤션 따름.	DRY + 프로젝트 일관성.