improve-codebase-architecture
Explore a codebase to find opportunities for architectural improvement, focusing on making the codebase more testable by deepening shallow modules. Use when: user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more AI-navigable.
What this skill does
# Improve Codebase Architecture Explore a codebase like an AI would, surface architectural friction, discover opportunities for improving testability, and propose module-deepening refactors as GitHub issue RFCs. A **deep module** (John Ousterhout, "A Philosophy of Software Design") has a small interface hiding a large implementation. Deep modules are more testable, more AI-navigable, and let you test at the boundary instead of inside. ## Process ### 1. Explore the codebase Use the Agent tool with subagent_type=Explore to navigate the codebase naturally. Do NOT follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction: - Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small files? - Where are modules so shallow that the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation? - Where have pure functions been extracted just for testability, but the real bugs hide in how they're called? - Where do tightly-coupled modules create integration risk in the seams between them? - Which parts of the codebase are untested, or hard to test? The friction you encounter IS the signal. ### 2. Present candidates Present a numbered list of deepening opportunities. For each candidate, show: - **Cluster**: Which modules/concepts are involved - **Why they're coupled**: Shared types, call patterns, co-ownership of a concept - **Dependency category**: See [REFERENCE.md](references/REFERENCE.md) for the four categories - **Test impact**: What existing tests would be replaced by boundary tests Do NOT propose interfaces yet. Ask the user: "Which of these would you like to explore?" ### 3. User picks a candidate ### 4. Frame the problem space Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space for the chosen candidate: - The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy - The dependencies it would need to rely on - A rough illustrative code sketch to make the constraints concrete — this is not a proposal, just a way to ground the constraints Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 5. The user reads and thinks about the problem while the sub-agents work in parallel. ### 5. Design multiple interfaces Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module. Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category, what's being hidden). This brief is independent of the user-facing explanation in Step 4. Give each agent a different design constraint: - Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1-3 entry points max" - Agent 2: "Maximize flexibility — support many use cases and extension" - Agent 3: "Optimize for the most common caller — make the default case trivial" - Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around the ports & adapters pattern for cross-boundary dependencies" Each sub-agent outputs: 1. Interface signature (types, methods, params) 2. Usage example showing how callers use it 3. What complexity it hides internally 4. Dependency strategy (how deps are handled — see [REFERENCE.md](references/REFERENCE.md)) 5. Trade-offs Present designs sequentially, then compare them in prose. After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not just a menu. ### 6. User picks an interface (or accepts recommendation) ### 7. Create GitHub issue Create a refactor RFC as a GitHub issue using `gh issue create`. Use the template in [REFERENCE.md](references/REFERENCE.md). Do NOT ask the user to review before creating — just create it and share the URL.
Related in General
modeling-omnistudio-epc-catalog
IncludedSalesforce Industries CME EPC product-modeling skill for Product2-based catalog creation. Use when creating EPC products, configuring product attributes, building offer bundles with Product Child Items, or reviewing EPC DataPack JSON metadata for product catalog changes. TRIGGER when: user creates or updates Product2 EPC records, AttributeAssignment payloads, AttributeMetadata/AttributeDefaultValues, Offer bundles, or ProductChildItem relationships. DO NOT TRIGGER when: designing OmniScripts/FlexCards/Integration Procedures (use building-omnistudio-omniscript, building-omnistudio-flexcard, or building-omnistudio-integration-procedure), implementing Apex business logic (use generating-apex), or troubleshooting deployment pipelines (use deploying-metadata).
relationship-science-coach
IncludedUse this skill for direct, practical adult relationship coaching: couples conflict, repair, trust, marriage, dating, flirting, attachment patterns, emotional connection, sex, desire differences, eroticism, kink negotiation, affection, love languages, breakups, and long-term passion. Draw on Gottman, EFT and Hold Me Tight, attachment science, modern sex research, Perel, Nagoski, Kerner, Schnarch, Love and Stosny, and flexible love-language tools. Be concrete and low-hedge. Redirect only for imminent danger, abuse, coercive control, minors, non-consent, self-harm, stalking, or medical/legal/psychiatric decisions.
building-sf-integrations
IncludedSalesforce integration architecture and runtime plumbing with 120-point scoring. Use this skill to set up Named Credentials, External Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callout patterns, Platform Events, and Change Data Capture. TRIGGER when: user sets up Named Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callouts, Platform Events, CDC, or touches .namedCredential-meta.xml files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: Connected App/OAuth config (use configuring-connected-apps), Apex-only logic (use generating-apex), or data import/export (use handling-sf-data).
venue-templates
IncludedAccess comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.
let-fate-decide
IncludedDraws the 12 Houses of the Zodiac Tarot spread to inject entropy into planning when prompts are vague, ambiguous, or casually delegated. Interprets the spread to guide next steps. Use when the user says 'let fate decide', 'YOLO', 'whatever', 'idk', or other nonchalant phrases, makes Yu-Gi-Oh references, or when you are about to arbitrarily pick between multiple reasonable approaches. Prefer over ask-questions-if-underspecified when the user's tone is casual or playful rather than precision-seeking.
net-ops
IncludedCross-platform network troubleshooting (Windows, macOS, Linux) via local or remote shell. Use for: DNS broken, can't resolve hostnames, nslookup/dig works but apps fail, NRPT, WFP, scutil, /etc/resolver, systemd-resolved, /etc/resolv.conf, NetworkManager, VPN DNS leak residue (ProtonVPN/Mullvad/WireGuard/AnyConnect), AV/firewall blocking DNS or DoH, Tailscale DNS interaction, intermittent connectivity, remote diagnostics over SSH.