// Design or review .NET solution architecture across modular monoliths, clean architecture, vertical slices, microservices, DDD, CQRS, and cloud-native boundaries without over-engineering.
Use a repo-root `.editorconfig` to configure free .NET analyzer and style rules. Use when a .NET repo needs rule severity, code-style options, section layout, or analyzer ownership made explicit. Nested `.editorconfig` files are allowed when they serve a clear subtree-specific purpose.
Use the open-source free `ArchUnitNET` library for architecture rules in .NET tests. Use when a repo needs richer architecture assertions than lightweight fluent rule libraries usually provide.
Use the free built-in .NET SDK analyzers and analysis levels with gradual Roslyn warning promotion. Use when a .NET repo needs first-party code analysis, `EnableNETAnalyzers`, `AnalysisLevel`, or warning-as-error policy wired into build and CI.
Use free built-in .NET maintainability analyzers and code metrics configuration to find overly complex methods and coupled code. Use when a repo needs cyclomatic complexity checks, maintainability thresholds, or complexity-driven refactoring gates.
Calculates CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) score for .NET methods, classes, or files. Use when the user asks to assess test quality, identify risky untested code, compute CRAP scores, or evaluate whether complex methods have sufficient test coverage. Requires code coverage data (Cobertura XML) and cyclomatic complexity analysis. DO NOT USE FOR: writing tests, general test execution unrelated to coverage/CRAP analysis, or general code coverage reporting without CRAP context.
Use the open-source free `CSharpier` formatter for C# and XML. Use when a .NET repo intentionally wants one opinionated formatter instead of a highly configurable `dotnet format`-driven style model.
| name | architecture |
| description | Design or review .NET solution architecture across modular monoliths, clean architecture, vertical slices, microservices, DDD, CQRS, and cloud-native boundaries without over-engineering. |
| compatibility | Best when project structure, service boundaries, or long-term maintainability are in scope. |
aspire when local orchestration, service discovery, and developer observability are part of the architecture story.