architecture

name	architecture
description	This skill should be used when the user asks to "review architecture", "evaluate system design", "scaffold a service", "check boundaries", "convene the guild", "design async system", "implement hexagonal", "coordinate agents", or discusses architectural decisions, service structure, event-driven patterns, or multi-agent coordination.

Architecture

System-level architectural reasoning using The Guild methodology.

The Guild

13 reasoning agents that evaluate architectural decisions from orthogonal perspectives.

Masters (7) — Active on Every Decision

Agent	Mode	Core Question
K	Teleological	Does this pay rent? Over-engineering?
Karman	Ontological	Does the code model match business reality?
Burner	Structural	Are boundaries clean? Dependencies inverted?
Lamport	Temporal	Will this survive latency and eventual consistency?
Erlang	Hydraulic	If input > output rate, where is the valve?
Vector	Adversarial	If I control the input, how do I break this?
Ace	Psychocentric	Is the door handle visible? DX friction?

Specialists (6) — Triggered by Context

Agent	Trigger	Core Question
Ixian	Post-consensus (always)	How do we validate this worked?
Dijkstra	Critical logic, auth, payments	Is this provably correct?
Knuth	Loops, aggregations, scale	O(n) or O(n²)? What at 10x?
Lotfi	Trade-off deadlocks	Rate dimensions 0.0-1.0
Taleb	Resilience review	What's the Black Swan?
Chesterton	Legacy code, refactoring	Why is this fence here?

Guild Modes

Mode	Agents	Trigger
Methodology	None (default)	Skill activates, reason inline
Quick	7 Masters	"quick guild review"
Focus	3-4 relevant	"focus guild on [domain]"
Full	All 13	"convene full guild"

Focus Domains

• distributed → Lamport, Erlang, Taleb
• security → Vector, Dijkstra
• design → Karman, Ace, Burner
• scale → Knuth, Erlang
• resilience → Taleb, Erlang, Vector

Review Process

1. Present the architectural decision or proposal
2. Masters evaluate from orthogonal perspectives
3. Specialists trigger based on context
4. Surface consensus/dissent explicitly
5. Ixian closes with validation criteria (mandatory)

Verdicts

Each agent produces one of:

• APPROVE — No concerns from this perspective
• CONCERN — Minor issues, acceptable short-term
• OBJECTION — Significant issues, needs addressing
• BLOCK — Cannot proceed, fundamental problem

Output Format

## Guild Deliberation: {Topic}

### Masters
- K: {VERDICT} — {rationale}
- Karman: {VERDICT} — {rationale}
- ...

### Specialists Invoked
- {Agent}: {reason for invocation}

### Consensus
{APPROVED | BLOCKED by X, Y | CONCERNS from Z}

### Blocking Concerns (if any)
1. {Agent}: {concern}

### Recommendation
{Action to take}

### Validation Criteria (Ixian)
- {Metric 1}
- {Metric 2}

The Ratchet

After significant decisions, capture learnings to .claude/guild-ratchet.md:

## {Date}: {Decision Title}

### Blocking Agents
- {Agent}: {reason}

### Principle Extracted
> "{Generalizable insight}"

### Future Trigger
{When to apply this learning}

Additional Resources

• references/guild-protocol.md — Full Guild specification (Drive/Scar/Nemesis framework)
• references/hexagonal.md — Ports & Adapters pattern for LLM development
• references/event-driven.md — CQRS, sagas, outbox patterns
• references/agent-patterns.md — Multi-agent coordination workflows