architecture-design

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST use
TaskCreate
to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST use
AskUserQuestion
at EVERY decision point — never assume user preferences. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST research top 3 options per architecture concern, compare with evidence, present report with recommendation + confidence %.
External Memory: For complex or lengthy work (research, analysis, scan, review), write intermediate findings and final results to a report file in
plans/reports/
— prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.
Evidence Gate: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST — every claim, finding, and recommendation requires
file:line
proof or traced evidence with confidence percentage (>80% to act, <80% must verify first).
强制要求 重要须知 在开始所有工作前,必须使用
TaskCreate
将其拆分为小型任务。 强制要求 重要须知 在每个决策点必须使用
AskUserQuestion
——绝不假设用户偏好。 强制要求 重要须知 针对每个架构关注点研究Top3方案,结合证据进行对比,呈现包含推荐方案及置信度百分比的报告。
外部内存:对于复杂或冗长的工作(研究、分析、扫描、评审),将中间结果和最终结果写入
plans/reports/
目录下的报告文件中——避免上下文丢失,同时作为交付物。
证据校验:强制要求 重要须知 —— 每一个主张、发现和推荐都需要
file:line
格式的证据或可追溯的证据,并附带置信度百分比(置信度>80%才可执行,<80%必须先验证)。

Quick Summary

快速概述

Goal: Act as a solution architect — research, critically analyze, and recommend the complete technical architecture for a project or feature. Cover ALL architecture concerns: backend, frontend, design patterns, library ecosystem, testing strategy, CI/CD, deployment, monitoring, code quality, and dependency management. Produce a comprehensive comparison report with actionable recommendations.
Workflow (12 steps):
  1. Load Context — Read domain model, tech stack, business evaluation, refined PBI
  2. Derive Architecture Requirements — Map business/domain complexity to architecture constraints
  3. Backend Architecture — Research top 3 backend architecture styles + design patterns
  4. Frontend Architecture — Research top 3 frontend architecture styles + design patterns
  5. Library Ecosystem Research — Best-practice libraries per concern (validation, caching, logging, utils, etc.)
  6. Testing Architecture — Unit, integration, E2E, performance testing frameworks + strategy
  7. CI/CD & Deployment — Pipeline design, containerization, orchestration, IaC
  8. Observability & Monitoring — Logging, metrics, tracing, alerting stack
  9. Code Quality & Clean Code — Linters, analyzers, formatters, enforcement tooling
  10. Dependency Risk Assessment — Package health, obsolescence risk, maintenance cost
  11. Generate Report — Full architecture decision report with all recommendations
  12. User Validation — Present findings, ask 8-12 questions, confirm all decisions
Key Rules:
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST research minimum 3 options per architecture concern with web evidence
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST include confidence % with evidence for every recommendation
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST run user validation interview at end (never skip)
  • Delegate to
    solution-architect
    agent for complex architecture decisions
  • All claims must cite sources (URL, benchmark, case study, or codebase evidence)
  • Never recommend based on familiarity alone — evidence required
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

目标:担任解决方案架构师——研究、批判性分析并为项目或功能推荐完整的技术架构。覆盖所有架构关注点:后端、前端、设计模式、库生态系统、测试策略、CI/CD、部署、监控、代码质量和依赖管理。生成包含可执行建议的综合对比报告。
工作流程(12步)
  1. 加载上下文 — 读取领域模型、技术栈、业务评估、细化后的PBI
  2. 推导架构需求 — 将业务/领域复杂度映射为架构约束
  3. 后端架构 — 研究Top3后端架构风格+设计模式
  4. 前端架构 — 研究Top3前端架构风格+设计模式
  5. 库生态系统研究 — 各关注点的最佳实践库(验证、缓存、日志、工具类等)
  6. 测试架构 — 单元测试、集成测试、E2E测试、性能测试框架+策略
  7. CI/CD与部署 — 流水线设计、容器化、编排、IaC
  8. 可观测性与监控 — 日志、指标、链路追踪、告警栈
  9. 代码质量与整洁代码 — 代码检查器、分析器、格式化工具、强制执行工具
  10. 依赖风险评估 — 包健康度、过时风险、维护成本
  11. 生成报告 — 包含所有推荐的完整架构决策报告
  12. 用户验证 — 呈现研究结果,提出8-12个问题,确认所有决策
核心规则
  • 强制要求 重要须知 针对每个架构关注点至少研究3个方案,并提供网络证据
  • 强制要求 重要须知 每个推荐方案必须附带置信度百分比和证据
  • 强制要求 重要须知 最后必须进行用户验证访谈(绝不跳过)
  • 复杂架构决策委托给
    solution-architect
    agent
  • 所有主张必须引用来源(URL、基准测试、案例研究或代码库证据)
  • 绝不仅凭熟悉度推荐——必须有证据支持
保持怀疑态度。运用批判性思维、顺序思维。每一个主张都需要可追溯的证据和置信度百分比(想法置信度需超过80%)。

Step 1: Load Context

步骤1:加载上下文

Read artifacts from prior workflow steps (search in
plans/
and
team-artifacts/
):
  • Domain model / ERD (complexity, bounded contexts, aggregate count)
  • Tech stack decisions (confirmed languages, frameworks, databases)
  • Business evaluation (scale, constraints, compliance)
  • Refined PBI (scope, acceptance criteria)
  • Discovery interview (team skills, experience level)
Extract and summarize:
SignalValueSource
Bounded contexts...domain model
Aggregate count...domain model
Cross-context events...domain model
Confirmed tech stack...tech stack phase
Expected scale...business eval
Team architecture exp....discovery
Compliance requirements...business eval
Real-time needsYes/Norefined PBI
Integration complexityLow/Med/Highdomain model
Deployment target...business eval

读取先前工作流程步骤中的工件(在
plans/
team-artifacts/
中搜索):
  • 领域模型/ERD(复杂度、限界上下文、聚合根数量)
  • 技术栈决策(已确认的语言、框架、数据库)
  • 业务评估(规模、约束、合规性)
  • 细化后的PBI(范围、验收标准)
  • 发现访谈(团队技能、经验水平)
提取并总结:
信号来源
限界上下文...领域模型
聚合根数量...领域模型
跨上下文事件...领域模型
已确认技术栈...技术栈阶段
预期规模...业务评估
团队架构经验...发现访谈
合规要求...业务评估
实时需求是/否细化后的PBI
集成复杂度低/中/高领域模型
部署目标...业务评估

Step 2: Derive Architecture Requirements

步骤2:推导架构需求

Map signals to architecture constraints:
SignalArchitecture RequirementPriority
Many bounded contextsClear module boundaries, context isolationMust
High scaleHorizontal scaling, stateless services, caching strategyMust
Complex domainRich domain model, separation of domain from infraMust
Cross-context eventsEvent-driven communication, eventual consistencyMust
Small teamLow ceremony, fewer layers, convention over configurationShould
ComplianceAudit trail, immutable events, access control layersMust
Real-timeEvent sourcing or pub/sub, WebSocket/SSE supportShould
High integration complexityAnti-corruption layers, adapter pattern, API gatewayShould
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST validate derived requirements with user via
AskUserQuestion
before proceeding.

将信号映射为架构约束:
信号架构需求优先级
多个限界上下文清晰的模块边界、上下文隔离必须
高规模需求水平扩展、无状态服务、缓存策略必须
复杂领域丰富的领域模型、领域与基础设施分离必须
跨上下文事件事件驱动通信、最终一致性必须
小型团队低仪式感、更少层级、约定优于配置应该
合规要求审计追踪、不可变事件、访问控制层必须
实时需求事件溯源或发布/订阅、WebSocket/SSE支持应该
高集成复杂度防腐层、适配器模式、API网关应该
强制要求 重要须知 在继续之前,必须通过
AskUserQuestion
与用户验证推导的需求。

Step 3: Backend Architecture

步骤3:后端架构

3A: Architecture Styles

3A:架构风格

WebSearch top 3 backend architecture styles. Candidates:
StyleBest ForResearch Focus
Clean ArchitectureComplex domains, long-lived projectsDependency rule, testability, flexibility
Hexagonal (Ports+Adapt)Integration-heavy, multiple I/O adaptersPort contracts, adapter isolation
Vertical SliceFeature-focused teams, rapid deliverySlice isolation, code locality
Modular MonolithStarting simple, eventual decompositionModule boundaries, migration path
MicroservicesLarge teams, independent deploymentService boundaries, operational overhead
CQRS + Event SourcingAudit-heavy, complex queriesRead/write separation, event store
Layered (N-Tier)Simple CRUD, small teamsLayer responsibilities, coupling risk
Web搜索Top3后端架构风格。候选风格:
架构风格适用场景研究重点
Clean Architecture复杂领域、长期维护的项目依赖规则、可测试性、灵活性
Hexagonal (Ports+Adapt)集成密集型、多I/O适配器场景端口契约、适配器隔离
Vertical Slice以功能为中心的团队、快速交付切片隔离、代码本地性
Modular Monolith从简单开始、最终拆分模块边界、迁移路径
Microservices大型团队、独立部署服务边界、运维开销
CQRS + Event Sourcing审计密集型、复杂查询读写分离、事件存储
Layered (N-Tier)简单CRUD、小型团队层级职责、耦合风险

3B: Backend Design Patterns

3B:后端设计模式

Evaluate applicability per layer:
PatternLayerWhen to Apply
RepositoryData AccessAbstract data store, enable testing
CQRSApplicationSeparate read/write models, complex queries
MediatorApplicationDecouple handlers from controllers
StrategyDomain/AppMultiple interchangeable algorithms
Observer/EventsDomainCross-aggregate side effects
FactoryDomainComplex object creation with invariants
DecoratorCross-cuttingAdd behavior without modifying (logging, caching)
AdapterInfrastructureIsolate external dependencies
SpecificationDomainComposable business rules, complex filtering
Unit of WorkData AccessTransaction management across repositories
Saga/Orchestr.Cross-serviceDistributed transactions, compensating actions
OutboxMessagingReliable event publishing with DB transactions
Circuit BreakerInfrastructureExternal service resilience
For each recommended pattern, document: Apply to, Why, Example, Risk if skipped.

评估各层级的适用性:
设计模式层级适用场景
Repository数据访问层抽象数据存储、支持测试
CQRS应用层读写模型分离、复杂查询
Mediator应用层解耦处理器与控制器
Strategy领域层/应用层多种可互换算法
Observer/Events领域层跨聚合根副作用
Factory领域层带不变量的复杂对象创建
Decorator横切关注点不修改原有代码的情况下添加行为(日志、缓存)
Adapter基础设施层隔离外部依赖
Specification领域层可组合的业务规则、复杂过滤
Unit of Work数据访问层跨仓库的事务管理
Saga/Orchestr.跨服务层分布式事务、补偿操作
Outbox消息层结合数据库事务的可靠事件发布
Circuit Breaker基础设施层外部服务容错
对于每个推荐的模式,记录:应用层级原因示例跳过风险

Step 4: Frontend Architecture

步骤4:前端架构

4A: Architecture Styles

4A:架构风格

WebSearch top 3 frontend architecture styles. Candidates:
StyleBest ForResearch Focus
MVVMData-binding heavy, forms-over-data appsViewModel responsibility, two-way binding
MVCServer-rendered, traditional web appsController routing, view separation
Component ArchitectureModern SPA (React, Angular, Vue)Component isolation, props/events, reuse
Reactive Store (Redux)Complex state, multi-component syncSingle source of truth, immutable state
Signal-based ReactivityFine-grained reactivity (Angular 19, Solid)Granular updates, no zone.js overhead
Micro FrontendsMultiple teams, independent deploymentModule federation, routing, shared state
Feature-based ModulesLarge monolith SPA, lazy loadingFeature boundaries, route-level splitting
Server Components (RSC)SEO, initial load performanceServer/client boundary, streaming
Web搜索Top3前端架构风格。候选风格:
架构风格适用场景研究重点
MVVM重度数据绑定、以表单数据为主的应用ViewModel职责、双向绑定
MVC服务端渲染、传统Web应用控制器路由、视图分离
Component Architecture现代SPA(React、Angular、Vue)组件隔离、Props/事件、复用
Reactive Store (Redux)复杂状态、多组件同步单一数据源、不可变状态
Signal-based Reactivity细粒度响应式(Angular 19、Solid)粒度更新、无zone.js开销
Micro Frontends多团队、独立部署模块联邦、路由、共享状态
Feature-based Modules大型单体SPA、懒加载功能边界、路由级拆分
Server Components (RSC)SEO、首屏加载性能服务端/客户端边界、流式传输

4B: Frontend Design Patterns

4B:前端设计模式

PatternLayerWhen to Apply
Container/PresentationalComponentSeparate logic from UI rendering
Reactive StoreStateCentralized state, cross-component communication
Facade ServiceServiceSimplify complex API interactions
Adapter/MapperDataTransform API response to view model
Observer (RxJS)AsyncEvent streams, real-time data, debounce/throttle
Strategy (renderers)UIConditional rendering strategies per entity type
Composite (components)UITree structures, recursive components
Command (undo/redo)UXForm wizards, canvas editors, undoable actions
Lazy LoadingPerformanceRoute/module-level code splitting
Virtual ScrollingPerformanceLarge lists, infinite scroll

设计模式层级适用场景
Container/Presentational组件层逻辑与UI渲染分离
Reactive Store状态层集中式状态、跨组件通信
Facade Service服务层简化复杂API交互
Adapter/Mapper数据层将API响应转换为视图模型
Observer (RxJS)异步层事件流、实时数据、防抖/节流
Strategy (renderers)UI层针对实体类型的条件渲染策略
Composite (components)UI层树形结构、递归组件
Command (undo/redo)UX层表单向导、画布编辑器、可撤销操作
Lazy Loading性能优化层路由/模块级代码拆分
Virtual Scrolling性能优化层大型列表、无限滚动

Step 4B: UI System Architecture

步骤4B:UI系统架构

Skip if: Backend-only project, no frontend component.
Research and recommend the project's design system architecture. Use
AskUserQuestion
for each decision.
跳过条件:纯后端项目,无前端组件。
研究并推荐项目的设计系统架构。每个决策都使用
AskUserQuestion

4B-1: Styling Approach

4B-1:样式方案

WebSearch top 3 styling approaches for the confirmed frontend framework:
ApproachBest ForResearch Focus
Utility-first (Tailwind CSS)Rapid prototyping, design enforcementJIT, custom config, design tokens
CSS Modules / Scoped CSSComponent isolation, no global conflictsNaming, composition patterns
SCSS/SASS with BEMComplex theming, token variablesBEM methodology, mixin libraries
CSS-in-JSDynamic styling, theme providersRuntime perf, SSR support
CSS Custom PropertiesNative theming, framework-agnosticBrowser support, fallback strategy
Web搜索已确认前端框架的Top3样式方案:
方案适用场景研究重点
Utility-first (Tailwind CSS)快速原型设计、设计规范落地JIT、自定义配置、设计令牌
CSS Modules / Scoped CSS组件隔离、无全局冲突命名规范、组合模式
SCSS/SASS with BEM复杂主题、令牌变量BEM方法论、混合库
CSS-in-JS动态样式、主题提供器运行时性能、SSR支持
CSS Custom Properties原生主题、框架无关浏览器支持、降级策略

4B-2: Design Token Strategy

4B-2:设计令牌策略

DecisionOptionsDefault
Token formatCSS custom properties / JSON / SCSS variablesCSS custom properties
Token categoriesColor, spacing, typography, breakpoints, shadows, z-indexAll
Token namingSemantic (
--color-primary
) vs Functional (
--btn-bg
)
Semantic first
ThemingLight/dark toggle / Multi-brand / Single themeSingle + dark mode
决策选项默认值
令牌格式CSS自定义属性 / JSON / SCSS变量CSS自定义属性
令牌分类颜色、间距、排版、断点、阴影、z-index全部
令牌命名语义化(
--color-primary
) vs 功能化(
--btn-bg
优先语义化
主题支持亮/暗模式切换 / 多品牌 / 单一主题单一主题+暗模式

4B-3: Component Library Strategy

4B-3:组件库策略

DecisionOptionsDefault
LibraryBuild custom / Headless (Radix, Headless UI) / Full kit (MUI, Ant, PrimeNG)Based on team and timeline
Component tiersCommon → Domain-Shared → Page (per ui-wireframe-protocol)Standard 3-tier
DocumentationStorybook / Docusaurus / In-code onlyBased on team size
决策选项默认值
组件库自定义构建 / Headless(Radix、Headless UI) / 完整套件(MUI、Ant、PrimeNG)基于团队和时间线
组件层级通用 → 领域共享 → 页面(遵循ui-wireframe-protocol)标准3-tier
文档Storybook / Docusaurus / 仅代码内文档基于团队规模

4B-4: Responsive Strategy

4B-4:响应式策略

DecisionOptionsDefault
ApproachMobile-first / Desktop-first / AdaptiveMobile-first
Breakpoints320/768/1024/1280 / CustomStandard
Grid systemCSS Grid / Flexbox / Framework gridCSS Grid + Flexbox
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST validate all UI system decisions with user via
AskUserQuestion
before proceeding to Step 5.

决策选项默认值
方案移动端优先 / 桌面端优先 / 自适应移动端优先
断点320/768/1024/1280 / 自定义标准
网格系统CSS Grid / Flexbox / 框架内置网格CSS Grid + Flexbox
强制要求 重要须知 在进入步骤5之前,必须通过
AskUserQuestion
与用户验证所有UI系统决策。

Step 5: Library Ecosystem Research

步骤5:库生态系统研究

For EACH concern below, WebSearch top 3 library options for the confirmed tech stack. Evaluate: maturity, community, bundle size, maintenance activity, license, learning curve.
针对以下每个关注点,Web搜索已确认技术栈的Top3库选项。评估:成熟度、社区活跃度、包体积、维护活跃度、许可证、学习曲线。

Library Concerns Checklist

库关注点清单

ConcernWhat to ResearchEvaluation Criteria
ValidationInput validation, schema validation, form validationType safety, composability, error messages
HTTP Client / API LayerREST client, GraphQL client, API code generationInterceptors, retry, caching, type generation
State ManagementGlobal store, local state, server state cachingDevTools, SSR support, bundle size
Utilities / HelpersDate/time, collections, deep clone, string manipulationTree-shakability, size, native alternatives
CachingIn-memory cache, distributed cache, HTTP cache, query cacheTTL, invalidation, persistence
LoggingStructured logging, log levels, log aggregationStructured output, transports, performance
Error HandlingGlobal error boundary, error tracking, crash reportingSource maps, breadcrumbs, alerting integration
Authentication / AuthZJWT, OAuth, RBAC/ABAC, session managementStandards compliance, SSO, token refresh
File Upload / StorageMultipart upload, cloud storage SDK, image processingStreaming, resumable, size limits
Real-timeWebSocket, SSE, SignalR, Socket.ioReconnection, scaling, protocol support
Internationalizationi18n, l10n, pluralization, date/number formattingICU support, lazy loading, extraction tools
PDF / ExportPDF generation, Excel export, CSVServer-side vs client-side, template support
关注点研究内容评估标准
验证输入验证、 schema验证、表单验证类型安全、可组合性、错误提示
HTTP客户端/API层REST客户端、GraphQL客户端、API代码生成拦截器、重试、缓存、类型生成
状态管理全局存储、本地状态、服务端状态缓存DevTools、SSR支持、包体积
工具类/辅助函数日期/时间、集合、深克隆、字符串处理摇树优化支持、体积、原生替代方案
缓存内存缓存、分布式缓存、HTTP缓存、查询缓存TTL、失效策略、持久化
日志结构化日志、日志级别、日志聚合结构化输出、传输方式、性能
错误处理全局错误边界、错误追踪、崩溃报告Source Maps、面包屑、告警集成
认证/授权JWT、OAuth、RBAC/ABAC、会话管理标准合规、SSO、令牌刷新
文件上传/存储多部分上传、云存储SDK、图像处理流式传输、可恢复、大小限制
实时WebSocket、SSE、SignalR、Socket.io重连机制、扩展性、协议支持
国际化i18n、l10n、复数化、日期/数字格式化ICU支持、懒加载、提取工具
PDF/导出PDF生成、Excel导出、CSV服务端vs客户端、模板支持

Per-Library Evaluation Template

单库评估模板

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

{Concern}: Top 3 Options

{关注点}:Top3选项

CriteriaOption AOption BOption C
GitHub Stars.........
Last Release.........
Bundle Size.........
Weekly Downloads.........
License.........
MaintenanceActive/Slow/Stale......
Learning CurveLow/Med/High......
Recommendation: {Option} — Confidence: {X}%

---
评估标准选项A选项B选项C
GitHub Stars.........
最后发布日期.........
包体积.........
周下载量.........
许可证.........
维护状态活跃/缓慢/停滞......
学习曲线低/中/高......
推荐方案: {选项} — 置信度:{X}%

---

Step 6: Testing Architecture

步骤6:测试架构

Research best testing tools and strategy for the confirmed tech stack:
Testing LayerWhat to ResearchTop Candidates to Compare
Unit TestingTest runner, assertion library, mocking frameworkJest/Vitest/xUnit/NUnit, mocking
Integration TestingAPI testing, DB testing, service testingSupertest, TestContainers, WebAppFactory
E2E TestingBrowser automation, BDD, visual regressionPlaywright/Cypress/Selenium, SpecFlow
Performance TestingLoad testing, stress testing, benchmarkingk6/Artillery/JMeter/NBomber, BenchmarkDotNet
Contract TestingAPI contract validation between servicesPact, Dredd, Spectral
Mutation TestingTest quality validationStryker, PITest
CoverageCode coverage collection, reporting, enforcementIstanbul/Coverlet, SonarQube
Test DataFactories, fixtures, seeders, fakersBogus/AutoFixture/Faker.js
研究已确认技术栈的最佳测试工具和策略:
测试层级研究内容候选对比工具
单元测试测试运行器、断言库、Mock框架Jest/Vitest/xUnit/NUnit、Mock工具
集成测试API测试、数据库测试、服务测试Supertest、TestContainers、WebAppFactory
E2E测试浏览器自动化、BDD、视觉回归Playwright/Cypress/Selenium、SpecFlow
性能测试负载测试、压力测试、基准测试k6/Artillery/JMeter/NBomber、BenchmarkDotNet
契约测试服务间API契约验证Pact、Dredd、Spectral
突变测试测试质量验证Stryker、PITest
覆盖率代码覆盖率收集、报告、强制执行Istanbul/Coverlet、SonarQube
测试数据工厂、 fixtures、种子数据、伪造数据Bogus/AutoFixture/Faker.js

Test Strategy Template

测试策略模板

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

Test Pyramid

测试金字塔

  • Unit (70%): {framework} — {what to test}
  • Integration (20%): {framework} — {what to test}
  • E2E (10%): {framework} — {what to test}
  • 单元测试(70%):{框架} — 测试内容
  • 集成测试(20%):{框架} — 测试内容
  • E2E测试(10%):{框架} — 测试内容

Coverage Targets

覆盖率目标

  • Unit: {X}% | Integration: {X}% | E2E: critical paths only
  • Enforcement: {tool} in CI pipeline, fail build below threshold

---
  • 单元测试:{X}% | 集成测试:{X}% | E2E测试:仅关键路径
  • 强制执行:CI流水线中使用{工具},低于阈值则构建失败

---

Step 7: CI/CD & Deployment

步骤7:CI/CD与部署

Research deployment architecture and CI/CD tooling:
ConcernWhat to ResearchTop Candidates to Compare
CI/CD PlatformPipeline orchestration, parallelism, cachingGitHub Actions/Azure DevOps/GitLab CI/Jenkins
ContainerizationContainer runtime, image building, registryDocker/Podman, BuildKit, ACR/ECR/GHCR
OrchestrationContainer orchestration, service mesh, scalingKubernetes/Docker Compose/ECS/Nomad
IaC (Infra as Code)Infrastructure provisioning, drift detectionTerraform/Pulumi/Bicep/CDK
Artifact ManagementPackage registry, versioning, vulnerability scanningNuGet/npm/Artifactory/GitHub Packages
Feature FlagsProgressive rollout, A/B testing, kill switchesLaunchDarkly/Unleash/Flagsmith
Secret ManagementVault, key rotation, environment variablesAzure KeyVault/HashiCorp Vault/SOPS
Database MigrationSchema versioning, rollback, seed dataEF Migrations/Flyway/Liquibase/dbmate
研究部署架构和CI/CD工具:
关注点研究内容候选对比工具
CI/CD平台流水线编排、并行执行、缓存GitHub Actions/Azure DevOps/GitLab CI/Jenkins
容器化容器运行时、镜像构建、镜像仓库Docker/Podman、BuildKit、ACR/ECR/GHCR
编排容器编排、服务网格、伸缩Kubernetes/Docker Compose/ECS/Nomad
IaC(基础设施即代码)基础设施部署、漂移检测Terraform/Pulumi/Bicep/CDK
工件管理包仓库、版本控制、漏洞扫描NuGet/npm/Artifactory/GitHub Packages
功能开关渐进式发布、A/B测试、熔断开关LaunchDarkly/Unleash/Flagsmith
密钥管理密钥库、密钥轮换、环境变量Azure KeyVault/HashiCorp Vault/SOPS
数据库迁移版本化Schema、回滚、种子数据EF Migrations/Flyway/Liquibase/dbmate

Deployment Strategy Comparison

部署策略对比

StrategyRiskDowntimeComplexityBest For
Blue-GreenLowZeroMediumCritical services
CanaryLowZeroHighGradual rollout
RollingMedZeroLowStateless services
RecreateHighYesLowDev/staging environments
Feature FlagsLowZeroMediumFeature-level control

策略风险停机时间复杂度适用场景
蓝绿部署核心服务
金丝雀部署渐进式发布
滚动部署无状态服务
重建部署开发/预发布环境
功能开关功能级控制

Step 8: Observability & Monitoring

步骤8:可观测性与监控

ConcernWhat to ResearchTop Candidates to Compare
Structured LoggingLog format, correlation IDs, log levels, aggregationSerilog/NLog/Winston/Pino
Log AggregationCentralized log search, dashboards, alertsELK/Loki+Grafana/Datadog/Seq
MetricsApplication metrics, custom counters, histogramsPrometheus/OpenTelemetry/App Insights
Distributed TracingRequest tracing across services, span visualizationJaeger/Zipkin/OpenTelemetry/Tempo
APMApplication performance monitoring, auto-instrumentationDatadog/New Relic/App Insights/Elastic
AlertingThreshold alerts, anomaly detection, on-call routingPagerDuty/OpsGenie/Grafana Alerting
Health ChecksLiveness, readiness, startup probesAspNetCore.Diagnostics/Terminus
Uptime MonitoringExternal availability monitoring, SLA trackingUptimeRobot/Pingdom/Checkly
关注点研究内容候选对比工具
结构化日志日志格式、关联ID、日志级别、聚合Serilog/NLog/Winston/Pino
日志聚合集中式日志搜索、仪表盘、告警ELK/Loki+Grafana/Datadog/Seq
指标应用指标、自定义计数器、直方图Prometheus/OpenTelemetry/App Insights
分布式链路追踪跨服务请求追踪、Span可视化Jaeger/Zipkin/OpenTelemetry/Tempo
APM应用性能监控、自动插桩Datadog/New Relic/App Insights/Elastic
告警阈值告警、异常检测、值班路由PagerDuty/OpsGenie/Grafana Alerting
健康检查存活探针、就绪探针、启动探针AspNetCore.Diagnostics/Terminus
可用性监控外部可用性监控、SLA跟踪UptimeRobot/Pingdom/Checkly

Observability Decision: 3 Pillars

可观测性决策:三大支柱

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

Recommended Observability Stack

推荐可观测性栈

PillarToolWhy
Logs{tool}{rationale}
Metrics{tool}{rationale}
Traces{tool}{rationale}
Alerting{tool}{rationale}

---
支柱工具原因
日志{工具}{理由}
指标{工具}{理由}
链路追踪{工具}{理由}
告警{工具}{理由}

---

Step 9: Code Quality & Clean Code Enforcement

步骤9:代码质量与整洁代码强制执行

Research and recommend tooling for automated code quality:
ConcernWhat to ResearchTop Candidates to Compare
Linter (Backend)Static analysis, code style, bug detectionRoslyn Analyzers/SonarQube/StyleCop/ReSharper
Linter (Frontend)JS/TS linting, accessibility, complexityESLint/Biome/oxlint
FormatterAuto-formatting, consistent stylePrettier/dotnet-format/EditorConfig
Code AnalyzerSecurity scanning, complexity metrics, duplicationSonarQube/CodeClimate/Codacy
Pre-commit HooksGit hooks, staged file validationHusky+lint-staged/pre-commit/Lefthook
Editor ConfigCross-IDE consistency.editorconfig/IDE-specific configs
Architecture RulesLayer dependency enforcement, naming conventionsArchUnit/NetArchTest/Dependency-Cruiser
API Design StandardsOpenAPI validation, naming, versioningSpectral/Redocly/swagger-lint
Commit ConventionsCommit message format, changelog generationCommitlint/Conventional Commits
Code Review AutomationAutomated PR review, suggestion botsDanger.js/Reviewdog/CodeRabbit
研究并推荐自动化代码质量工具:
关注点研究内容候选对比工具
后端代码检查器静态分析、代码风格、Bug检测Roslyn Analyzers/SonarQube/StyleCop/ReSharper
前端代码检查器JS/TS代码检查、可访问性、复杂度ESLint/Biome/oxlint
格式化工具自动格式化、一致风格Prettier/dotnet-format/EditorConfig
代码分析器安全扫描、复杂度指标、重复代码检测SonarQube/CodeClimate/Codacy
提交前钩子Git钩子、暂存文件验证Husky+lint-staged/pre-commit/Lefthook
编辑器配置跨IDE一致性.editorconfig/IDE特定配置
架构规则层级依赖强制执行、命名约定ArchUnit/NetArchTest/Dependency-Cruiser
API设计标准OpenAPI验证、命名、版本控制Spectral/Redocly/swagger-lint
提交规范提交消息格式、变更日志生成Commitlint/Conventional Commits
代码评审自动化自动化PR评审、建议机器人Danger.js/Reviewdog/CodeRabbit

Enforcement Strategy

强制执行策略

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

Code Quality Gates

代码质量门禁

GateToolTriggerFail Criteria
Pre-commit{tool}git commitLint errors, format
PR Check{tool}Pull requestCoverage < X%, issues
CI Pipeline{tool}Push to branchBuild fail, test fail
Scheduled{tool}Weekly/nightlySecurity vulns, debt
undefined
门禁工具触发条件失败标准
提交前{工具}git commit代码检查错误、格式问题
PR检查{工具}Pull request覆盖率<X%、问题项
CI流水线{工具}推送至分支构建失败、测试失败
定时扫描{工具}每周/夜间安全漏洞、技术债务
undefined

Scaffold Handoff (MANDATORY — consumed by
/scaffold
)

脚手架交付(强制要求 — 供
/scaffold
使用)

Ref:
.claude/skills/shared/scaffold-production-readiness-protocol.md
After completing code quality research, produce this handoff table in the architecture report. The
/scaffold
skill reads this table to generate actual config files — without it, scaffold cannot auto-configure quality tooling.
markdown
undefined
参考:
.claude/skills/shared/scaffold-production-readiness-protocol.md
完成代码质量研究后,在架构报告中生成此交付表。
/scaffold
技能会读取此表生成实际配置文件——没有它,脚手架无法自动配置质量工具。
markdown
undefined

Scaffold Handoff — Tool Choices

脚手架交付 — 工具选择

ConcernChosen ToolConfig FileRationale
Linter (FE){tool}{filename}{why}
Linter (BE){tool}{filename}{why}
Formatter{tool}{filename}{why}
Pre-commit{tool}{filename}{why}
Error handling{pattern}{files}{why}
Loading state{pattern}{files}{why}
Docker{compose pattern}{files}{why}

**Also include:** Error handling strategy (4-layer pattern), loading state approach (global vs per-component), and Docker profile structure. See protocol for framework-specific options.

---
关注点选定工具配置文件理由
前端代码检查器{工具}{文件名}{原因}
后端代码检查器{工具}{文件名}{原因}
格式化工具{工具}{文件名}{原因}
提交前钩子{工具}{文件名}{原因}
错误处理{模式}{文件}{原因}
加载状态{模式}{文件}{原因}
Docker{组合模式}{文件}{原因}

**还需包含:** 错误处理策略(4层模式)、加载状态方案(全局vs组件级)、Docker配置文件结构。参考协议获取框架特定选项。

---

Step 10: Dependency Risk Assessment

步骤10:依赖风险评估

For EVERY recommended library/package, evaluate maintenance and obsolescence risk:
针对每个推荐的库/包,评估维护和过时风险:

Package Health Scorecard

包健康度评分卡

CriteriaScore (1-5)How to Verify
Last Release Date...npm/NuGet page — stale if >12 months
Open Issues Ratio...GitHub issues open vs closed
Maintainer Count...Bus factor — single maintainer = high risk
Breaking Change Freq....Changelog — frequent major versions = churn cost
Dependency Depth...
npm ls --depth
/ dependency graph depth
Known Vulnerabilities...Snyk/npm audit/GitHub Dependabot
License Compatibility...SPDX identifier — check viral licenses (GPL)
Community Activity...Monthly commits, PR merge rate, Discord/forums
Migration Path...Can swap to alternative if abandoned?
Framework Alignment...Official recommendation by framework team?
评估标准评分(1-5)验证方式
最后发布日期...npm/NuGet页面 — 超过12个月未更新则视为停滞
开放问题比例...GitHub开放问题vs已关闭问题
维护者数量...总线因子 — 单一维护者=高风险
重大变更频率...变更日志 — 频繁大版本更新=迁移成本高
依赖深度...
npm ls --depth
/ 依赖图深度
已知漏洞...Snyk/npm audit/GitHub Dependabot
许可证兼容性...SPDX标识符 — 检查病毒式许可证(如GPL)
社区活跃度...月提交量、PR合并率、Discord/论坛活跃度
迁移路径...若包被弃用,能否切换至替代方案?
框架对齐...是否为框架团队官方推荐?

Risk Categories

风险分类

Risk LevelCriteriaAction
LowActive, >3 maintainers, recent release, no CVEsUse freely
Medium1-2 maintainers, release <6mo, minor CVEs patchedUse with monitoring plan
HighSingle maintainer, >12mo stale, open CVEsFind alternative or plan exit strategy
CriticalAbandoned, unpatched CVEs, deprecatedDO NOT USE — find replacement
风险等级判定标准应对措施
活跃维护、>3个维护者、最近发布、无CVE漏洞自由使用
1-2个维护者、6个月内发布、小漏洞已修复谨慎使用并制定监控计划
单一维护者、>12个月未更新、未修复CVE漏洞寻找替代方案或制定退出策略
严重已弃用、未修复CVE漏洞、已被标记为废弃禁止使用 — 寻找替代方案

Dependency Maintenance Strategy

依赖维护策略

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

Recommended Practices

推荐实践

  1. Automated scanning: {tool} (Dependabot/Renovate/Snyk) — weekly PR for updates
  2. Lock file strategy: Commit lock files, pin major versions, allow patch auto-update
  3. Audit schedule: Monthly
    npm audit
    /
    dotnet list package --vulnerable
  4. Vendor policy: Max {N} dependencies per concern, prefer well-maintained alternatives
  5. Exit strategy: For each High-risk dependency, document migration path to alternative

---
  1. 自动化扫描: {工具}(Dependabot/Renovate/Snyk) — 每周提交更新PR
  2. 锁文件策略: 提交锁文件、固定大版本、允许补丁自动更新
  3. 审计计划: 每月执行
    npm audit
    /
    dotnet list package --vulnerable
  4. 供应商政策: 每个关注点最多{N}个依赖,优先选择维护良好的替代方案
  5. 退出策略: 为每个高风险依赖记录迁移至替代方案的路径

---

Step 11: Generate Report

步骤11:生成报告

Write report to
{plan-dir}/research/architecture-design.md
with sections:
  1. Executive summary (recommended architecture in 8-10 lines)
  2. Architecture requirements table (from Step 2)
  3. Backend architecture — style comparison + recommended patterns (Steps 3)
  4. Frontend architecture — style comparison + recommended patterns (Step 4)
  5. Library ecosystem — per-concern recommendations with alternatives (Step 5)
  6. Testing architecture — pyramid, tools, coverage targets (Step 6)
  7. CI/CD & deployment — pipeline design, deployment strategy (Step 7)
  8. Observability stack — 3 pillars + alerting (Step 8)
  9. Code quality — enforcement gates, tooling (Step 9)
  10. Dependency risk matrix — high-risk packages, mitigation (Step 10)
  11. Architecture diagram (Mermaid — showing all layers and data flow)
  12. Risk assessment for overall architecture
  13. Unresolved questions
将报告写入
{plan-dir}/research/architecture-design.md
,包含以下章节:
  1. 执行摘要(8-10行总结推荐架构)
  2. 架构需求表(来自步骤2)
  3. 后端架构 — 风格对比+推荐模式(步骤3)
  4. 前端架构 — 风格对比+推荐模式(步骤4)
  5. 库生态系统 — 各关注点推荐方案及替代选项(步骤5)
  6. 测试架构 — 测试金字塔、工具、覆盖率目标(步骤6)
  7. CI/CD与部署 — 流水线设计、部署策略(步骤7)
  8. 可观测性栈 — 三大支柱+告警(步骤8)
  9. 代码质量 — 强制执行门禁、工具(步骤9)
  10. 依赖风险矩阵 — 高风险包、缓解措施(步骤10)
  11. 架构图(Mermaid — 展示所有层级和数据流)
  12. 整体架构风险评估
  13. 未解决问题

Architecture Diagram Template

架构图模板

markdown
```mermaid
graph TB
    subgraph "Frontend"
        UI[SPA / Micro Frontend]
        STORE[State Management]
    end
    subgraph "API Gateway"
        GW[Gateway / BFF]
    end
    subgraph "Backend Services"
        CMD[Commands / Handlers]
        QRY[Queries / Read Models]
        SVC[Domain Services]
        ENT[Entities / Aggregates]
    end
    subgraph "Infrastructure"
        DB[(Database)]
        CACHE[(Cache)]
        MSG[Message Bus]
        SEARCH[(Search Index)]
    end
    subgraph "Observability"
        LOG[Logging]
        METRIC[Metrics]
        TRACE[Tracing]
    end
    subgraph "CI/CD"
        PIPE[Pipeline]
        REG[Container Registry]
        K8S[Orchestration]
    end
    UI --> GW --> CMD & QRY
    CMD --> SVC --> ENT --> DB
    QRY --> CACHE & SEARCH
    ENT -.-> MSG
    CMD & QRY -.-> LOG & METRIC & TRACE
    PIPE --> REG --> K8S
```

markdown
```mermaid
graph TB
    subgraph "Frontend"
        UI[SPA / Micro Frontend]
        STORE[State Management]
    end
    subgraph "API Gateway"
        GW[Gateway / BFF]
    end
    subgraph "Backend Services"
        CMD[Commands / Handlers]
        QRY[Queries / Read Models]
        SVC[Domain Services]
        ENT[Entities / Aggregates]
    end
    subgraph "Infrastructure"
        DB[(Database)]
        CACHE[(Cache)]
        MSG[Message Bus]
        SEARCH[(Search Index)]
    end
    subgraph "Observability"
        LOG[Logging]
        METRIC[Metrics]
        TRACE[Tracing]
    end
    subgraph "CI/CD"
        PIPE[Pipeline]
        REG[Container Registry]
        K8S[Orchestration]
    end
    UI --> GW --> CMD & QRY
    CMD --> SVC --> ENT --> DB
    QRY --> CACHE & SEARCH
    ENT -.-> MSG
    CMD & QRY -.-> LOG & METRIC & TRACE
    PIPE --> REG --> K8S
```

Step 12: User Validation Interview

步骤12:用户验证访谈

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST present findings and ask 8-12 questions via
AskUserQuestion
:
强制要求 重要须知 呈现研究结果并通过
AskUserQuestion
提出8-12个问题:

Required Questions

必选问题

  1. Backend architecture — "I recommend {style}. Agree?"
  2. Frontend architecture — "I recommend {style} with {state management}. Agree?"
  3. Design patterns — "Recommended backend patterns: {list}. Frontend patterns: {list}. Any to add/remove?"
  4. Key libraries — "For {concern}, I recommend {lib} over {alternatives}. Agree?"
  5. Testing strategy — "Test pyramid: {unit}%/{integration}%/{E2E}% using {frameworks}. Appropriate?"
  6. CI/CD — "Pipeline: {tool} with {deployment strategy}. Fits your infra?"
  7. Observability — "Monitoring stack: {logs}/{metrics}/{traces}. Sufficient?"
  8. Code quality — "Enforcement: {linter + formatter + pre-commit hooks}. Team ready?"
  9. Dependency risk — "Found {N} high-risk dependencies. Accept or find alternatives?"
  10. Complexity check — "This architecture has {N} concerns addressed. Appropriate for team size?"
  1. 后端架构 — "我推荐{风格}。是否同意?"
  2. 前端架构 — "我推荐{风格}搭配{状态管理工具}。是否同意?"
  3. 设计模式 — "推荐的后端模式:{列表}。前端模式:{列表}。是否需要添加/移除?"
  4. 核心库 — "针对{关注点},我推荐{库}而非{替代选项}。是否同意?"
  5. 测试策略 — "测试金字塔:{单元}%/{集成}%/{E2E}%,使用{框架}。是否合适?"
  6. CI/CD — "流水线:{工具}搭配{部署策略}。是否适配你的基础设施?"
  7. 可观测性 — "监控栈:{日志}/{指标}/{链路追踪}。是否足够?"
  8. 代码质量 — "强制执行方案:{代码检查器+格式化工具+提交前钩子}。团队是否准备就绪?"
  9. 依赖风险 — "发现{N}个高风险依赖。是否接受或寻找替代方案?"
  10. 复杂度检查 — "此架构涵盖{N}个关注点。是否适配团队规模?"

Optional Deep-Dive Questions (pick 2-3)

可选深度问题(选2-3个)

  • "Should we use event sourcing or traditional state-based persistence?"
  • "Monolith-first or start with service boundaries?"
  • "Micro frontends or monolith SPA?"
  • "How important is framework independence for this project?"
  • "Self-hosted observability or managed SaaS?"
  • "Strict lint rules from day 1 or gradual adoption?"
After user confirms, update report with final decisions and mark as
status: confirmed
.

  • "我们应该使用事件溯源还是传统的基于状态的持久化?"
  • "先做单体应用还是直接划分服务边界?"
  • "微前端还是单体SPA?"
  • "框架独立性对这个项目有多重要?"
  • "自托管可观测性还是托管SaaS?"
  • "从第一天开始严格执行代码检查规则还是逐步采用?"
用户确认后,更新报告中的最终决策并标记为
status: confirmed

Best Practices Audit (applied across all steps)

最佳实践审计(适用于所有步骤)

Validate architecture against these principles — flag violations in report:
PrincipleCheckStatus
Single Responsibility (S)Each class/module has one reason to change✅/⚠️
Open/Closed (O)Extensible without modifying existing code✅/⚠️
Liskov Substitution (L)Subtypes substitutable for base types✅/⚠️
Interface Segregation (I)No forced dependency on unused interfaces✅/⚠️
Dependency Inversion (D)High-level modules depend on abstractions, not concretions✅/⚠️
DRYNo duplicated business logic across layers✅/⚠️
KISSSimplest architecture that meets requirements✅/⚠️
YAGNINo speculative layers or patterns for future needs✅/⚠️
Separation of ConcernsClear boundaries between domain, application, infra✅/⚠️
IoC / Dependency InjectionAll dependencies injected, no
new
in business logic
✅/⚠️
Technical AgnosticismDomain layer has zero framework/infra dependencies✅/⚠️
TestabilityArchitecture supports unit + integration testing✅/⚠️
12-Factor AppConfig in env, stateless processes, port binding✅/⚠️
Fail-FastValidate early, fail with clear errors✅/⚠️

对照这些原则验证架构——在报告中标记违规项:
原则检查项状态
单一职责原则(S)每个类/模块只有一个变更理由✅/⚠️
开放封闭原则(O)可扩展无需修改现有代码✅/⚠️
里氏替换原则(L)子类型可替换基类型✅/⚠️
接口隔离原则(I)无强制依赖未使用的接口✅/⚠️
依赖倒置原则(D)高层模块依赖抽象而非具体实现✅/⚠️
DRY各层无重复业务逻辑✅/⚠️
KISS满足需求的最简架构✅/⚠️
YAGNI无针对未来需求的投机性层级或模式✅/⚠️
关注点分离领域、应用、基础设施边界清晰✅/⚠️
控制反转/依赖注入所有依赖均注入,业务逻辑中无
new
调用
✅/⚠️
技术无关性领域层无框架/基础设施依赖✅/⚠️
可测试性架构支持单元+集成测试✅/⚠️
12要素应用配置在环境变量中、无状态进程、端口绑定✅/⚠️
快速失败尽早验证、清晰报错✅/⚠️

Output

输出

{plan-dir}/research/architecture-design.md     # Full architecture analysis report
{plan-dir}/phase-02b-architecture.md           # Confirmed architecture decisions

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST break work into small todo tasks using
TaskCreate
BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST validate EVERY architecture recommendation with user via
AskUserQuestion
— never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST include confidence % and evidence citations for all claims. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST add a final review todo task to verify work quality.

{plan-dir}/research/architecture-design.md     # 完整架构分析报告
{plan-dir}/phase-02b-architecture.md           # 已确认的架构决策

强制要求 重要须知 在开始前必须使用
TaskCreate
将工作拆分为小型待办任务。 强制要求 重要须知 必须通过
AskUserQuestion
验证每一个架构推荐——绝不自行决策。 强制要求 重要须知 所有主张必须包含置信度百分比和证据引用。 强制要求 重要须知 添加最终评审待办任务以验证工作质量。

Next Steps

下一步

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST after completing this skill, use
AskUserQuestion
to recommend:
  • "/plan (Recommended)" — Create implementation plan from architecture design
  • "/refine" — If need to create PBIs first
  • "Skip, continue manually" — user decides
强制要求 重要须知 完成此技能后,使用
AskUserQuestion
推荐:
  • "/plan(推荐)" — 根据架构设计创建实施计划
  • "/refine" — 若需先创建PBI
  • "跳过,手动继续" — 由用户决定

Closing Reminders

最终提醒

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST break work into small todo tasks using
TaskCreate
BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST validate decisions with user via
AskUserQuestion
— never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST add a final review todo task to verify work quality.
强制要求 重要须知 在开始前必须使用
TaskCreate
将工作拆分为小型待办任务。 强制要求 重要须知 必须通过
AskUserQuestion
验证决策——绝不自行决策。 强制要求 重要须知 添加最终评审待办任务以验证工作质量。