git:20260921.5c2df16 to git:20260921.93b5e1e

---

name: arch-review-storage

description: "Review code or a change through the Storage lenses of the Software Design and Architecture Guidelines. Covers The Storage Layer and Identifiers: storage principles, tables, translation, roles, migrations. Use for a change that touches this area, or as one leg of arch-review-full."

allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash(python3:*), Bash(git diff:*), Bash(git log:*), Bash(git status:*), Bash(git rev-parse:*), Bash(git merge-base:*), Bash(git symbolic-ref:*)

---

# arch-review-storage

Judge the code from one perspective only: the lenses in

`${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../lenses/storage.md`. Other perspectives have

their own skills; do not borrow their rules, and do not flag anything

a lens in this file does not name. The guideline itself is at

`${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../architecture.md` when a lens needs its

source read in full. If either file is missing, stop and say the

installation is incomplete.

## Input

`$ARGUMENTS` names what to review. Interpret it as follows, in order:

1. Empty: the current branch's changes against the repository's default

branch (committed since the merge base, plus the working tree). The

default branch is `origin/HEAD` when set, else `main`, else

`master`. When the scope resolves to no files, report "nothing to

review" in the report's Scope line and stop.

2. A path or glob: every file under it, as it is now. A path that does

not exist is an error; say so and stop.

3. A git ref or range (`abc123`, `main..HEAD`): the diff of that range.

4. The word `all`: the whole repository. Expect this to take a while.

Read changed files in full, not only the changed lines. Rules break in

the interaction between the new code and its neighbors, so pull in the

interface a class implements, the root that wires it, and the callers

of a changed signature.

## Procedure

1. Read the lens file end to end before looking at any code.

2. Establish the scope and list the files in it.

3. Run the checker that shipped with this lens file, from the root of

the repository under review:

`python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../checkers/arch_check.py" --group storage --format json`.

Exit 0 means no findings and exit 1 means findings; both are a

run. Its findings on files outside the scope are dropped, and so is

anything under `exceptions_applied`: a deviation the project

recorded with an ADR, which is not a finding. The output's

`rules_run` says which lenses it covered, the rules this guideline

ships and the project's own alike, each with a coverage and a

summary. A lens covered `full` is decided here: each of its

findings in scope is a finding, with the checker's file and line,

and no finding is a pass whose evidence is the checker, which read

every file. A lens covered `partial` is decided in step 4, and the

rule's summary says which part the checker holds: a checker finding

in scope makes the lens a finding whatever the rest shows, and no

checker finding leaves the rest to judge; the lens passes only when

that rest passes too. A lens absent from `rules_run` is judged whole

in step 4. When the checker cannot run (a Python older than 3.11,

4. For every lens the checker did not decide, in id order, decide one

of: **finding** (evidence of a breach, with a file and line),

**pass** (the lens applies and the code satisfies it), **not

applicable** (nothing in scope touches what the lens judges), or

**unverified** (the lens applies, and what would decide it lies

outside the scope and the neighbors the Input section says to read;

name what would decide it). A partial lens whose judged part touches

5. Verify every finding against the real source: open the file, confirm

the line, confirm the surrounding code does not already handle it.

Drop a finding you cannot point at. Verify a **pass** on a `high`

lens the same way: open the file that would breach it and name that

file in the report; a high lens passes on evidence, never on the

absence of a finding, and a high lens whose evidence is out of

reach is unverified, never passed. A clean run of the checker is

evidence for a lens it decides whole; name `arch-check` as the proof.

For a partial high lens it is evidence for the checker's part only,

and the rest needs a file of its own.

6. Assign severity from the lens, adjusted only downward when the

breach is contained (a test double, a documented exception the

guideline names, an ADR cited next to the code).

7. Write the report in the format below. Nothing else; no preamble.

Never edit, stage, or commit. This skill reads and reports.

## Output

```markdown

# Architecture review: Storage

**Scope.** <what was reviewed, in one line>

**Lenses.** <n> applied, <p> passed, <f> findings, <u> unverified, <x> not applicable

## Findings

- **<LENS-ID> <severity>** `<path>:<line>` <what breaks the rule, one sentence>. Fix: <one sentence>.

## Passed

<LENS-ID>, <LENS-ID> (`<path>`), ...

## Unverified

<LENS-ID> (<what would decide it, a few words>), ...

## Not applicable

<LENS-ID> (<why, a few words>), ...

```

Findings are ordered most severe first, then by file. When there are

no findings, the section reads `No findings.`; an empty Unverified

section reads `None.` A `high` lens in Passed names the file that

proved it. Every lens id in the lens file appears in exactly one of

the four sections. Applied is passed plus findings plus unverified,

so applied plus not applicable is the number of lenses in the file.