feat: add an on-demand architecture-reviewer agent for deepening scans

Ultraworked with [Sisyphus](https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent) Co-authored-by: Sisyphus <clio-agent@sisyphuslabs.ai>
2026-08-24 15:07:50 -06:00
parent dbb0c51b7e
commit 720591d24a
4 changed files with 228 additions and 2 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+# Architecture Reviewer
+
+An **on-demand architecture improvement scout**. It scans a codebase for **deepening
+opportunities** — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones — presents them as a visual
+report, then refines the candidate you pick into a concrete, implementation-ready interface
+proposal.
+
+Two things it is deliberately **not**:
+
+1. **Not a completion gate.** The review stack ([`code-reviewer`](../code-reviewer/README.md),
+   [`adversary`](../adversary/README.md), [`security-reviewer`](../security-reviewer/README.md))
+   judges *changes* before a task finishes. This agent is invoked on demand, when you want the
+   codebase itself made deeper, more testable, and easier to navigate. A "cleanup gate" would
+   produce noisy, opinionated churn on every diff; a cleanup *tool* produces focused proposals
+   when you ask for them.
+2. **Not an implementer.** It proposes; you (or a `coder` you delegate to) implement. Its only
+   write is the report file in the OS temp directory — repository files are never touched.
+
+## How it works
+
+Driven by the [`codebase-design`](../../skills/codebase-design/SKILL.md) skill — the shared
+deep-module vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**,
+**locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one
+adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real").
+
+1. **Scope by git history (YAGNI).** Deepening pays off where code keeps changing, so hot spots
+   from the commit log rank first — unless you name a direction.
+2. **Explore for friction.** Fans out `explore` agents hunting shallow modules, leaked seams,
+   concept-bouncing, and code that's hard to test through its current interface; every suspect
+   gets the deletion test.
+3. **Report candidates.** 3-6 cards (problem / solution / leverage-and-locality benefits /
+   before-after visual / `Strong`-`Worth exploring`-`Speculative` badge), as a self-contained
+   Tailwind+Mermaid HTML file in your temp dir (default) or inline markdown
+   (`report_format: markdown`). Ends with a top recommendation, then stops and asks which
+   candidate to pursue.
+4. **Refine via design-it-twice.** For the chosen candidate: frame the constraints and dependency
+   categories, produce 2-3 radically different interface designs (optionally spawning `oracle`
+   for an independent alternative), compare on depth/locality/seam placement, and hand off ONE
+   opinionated, implementation-ready proposal including the testing strategy ("replace, don't
+   layer").
+
+## Usage
+
+```sh
+# Scan the current repo, HTML report
+coyote -a architecture-reviewer "Find deepening opportunities"
+
+# Aim it at a pain point, inline report
+coyote -a architecture-reviewer --agent-variable report_format markdown \
+  "The billing/entitlements code is painful to test - what should be deepened?"
+```
+
+Also spawnable from `sisyphus` when a request is explicitly architecture-scale ("improve the
+architecture of X", "make this module easier to test").
+
+## Related
+
+- [`codebase-design`](../../skills/codebase-design/SKILL.md) — the vocabulary and principles it runs on.
+- [`oracle`](../oracle/README.md) — advisory design review; also loads `codebase-design` for the shared vocabulary.
+- [`explore`](../explore/README.md) — the codebase walkers it fans out.
+
+## Credits
+
+Adapted from the `codebase-design` and `improve-codebase-architecture` skills in
+[mattpocock/skills](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills) (MIT), which build on ideas from John
+Ousterhout's *A Philosophy of Software Design* and Michael Feathers' *Working Effectively with
+Legacy Code*.