git:20261106.1a5f142 to git:20261108.7e14cbb

45 added, 50 removed. Audit B to B.

---

description: Assesses the current repository's architecture area by area for evidence-backed systemic refactorings (duplicated knowledge, misplaced ownership, reinvented abstractions, crossed boundaries) and saves the findings the user picks as refactoring ideas, for a later planned change to pull in. Invoked when the user wants to assess the architecture, find refactoring opportunities across the codebase, or runs /aido:assess-architecture.

disable-model-invocation: false

---

# Assess the Architecture

- Review the repository's design area by area, independent of any feature, and park the findings the

- user picks as refactoring opportunities. `/aido:1-plan` offers them when a planned change can

- include them, so each refactoring is made as part of a working feature.

+ Review the repository's design area by area, apart from any feature. Park the findings the user picks

+ as refactoring opportunities. `/aido:1-plan` offers them when a planned change can include them, so

+ each refactoring is made as part of a working feature.

This skill reads the repository and never edits it. It writes only the opportunity files the user

- explicitly chose, which live outside the repository.

+ explicitly picked, which live outside the repository.

Load `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/language.md` and follow it in everything you write for a person.

## Step 0: Load Context

- - identify `<repo-name>` and the index directory as defined in **Index Location and Shape** in

- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/map-architecture/SKILL.md`

- - load `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/systemic-refactoring.md`, which defines what to look for, the

- evidence rule and how to park an opportunity, `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/code-standards.md`, whose "Architecture" and "Code Quality" hold the

- rules each finding is judged by, and `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/project-conventions.md`, then gather the host repository's conventions as it

- describes

+ - find `<repo-name>` and the index directory, as **Index Location and Shape** in

+ `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/architecture-index.md` defines them

+ - load:

+ - `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/systemic-refactoring.md`: what to look for, the evidence rule

+ and how to park an opportunity

+ - `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/code-standards.md`: its "Architecture" and "Code Quality" hold

+ the rules each finding is judged by

+ - `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/project-conventions.md`. Then gather the host repository's

+ conventions as it describes

- run `git fetch origin`

- **no index** → `AskUserQuestion`: "This repository has no map of its architecture, and the assessment needs one. Should I build it first?" — options **Run /aido:map-architecture first** / **Cancel**. On the first, run that skill, then

continue here

- **index stale** (see **Staleness** under **Index Location and Shape**) →

`AskUserQuestion`: "The architecture map is `<n>` commits old. Should I update it first?" — options **Update it first

(Recommended)** / **Assess with it as is**

## Step 1: Choose the Scope

Read `architecture/README.md` and show its areas. Then `AskUserQuestion`: "Which areas should I

assess?" — options **All areas** / **Specific areas** (the user names them).

## Step 2: Assess Each Area — `fable` subagents

- Launch one `Agent` per area with `model: "fable"`, in parallel. Brief each with:

+ Launch one `Agent` per area with `model: "fable"`, in parallel. Brief each with

+ "The Shared Brief" in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/subagents.md`, and:

- - the area's two file paths (`<area-slug>.md` and `<area-slug>.extra.md` — the second holds the

- infrastructure, misfits and observations this assessment needs), the `README.md` path, and

- the repository root

- - to look across the area boundary by searching the other areas' files for this area's rules and

- terms, as in **Reading the Index** in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/map-architecture/SKILL.md` — not by

- reading them whole

- - `systemic-refactoring.md` and the rules it points to in `code-standards.md`, copied

- — the subagent has not loaded the guidelines

- - `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/language.md`, copied in full, so what it returns follows it. The

- sections and labels it is asked for stay as they are, and it returns a report and adds no ending

- block

- - to apply it inside the area **and** across its boundary with other areas (e.g. the same rule

- enforced in this area and another)

- - to treat the index as a map only — read the code before claiming anything

- - to group related findings in the area into one candidate, so the volume stays low

- - never to edit files

+ - the area's two file paths, `<area-slug>.md` and `<area-slug>.extra.md`. The second holds the

+ infrastructure, misfits and observations this assessment needs. Add the `README.md` path and the

+ repository root

+ - to look across the area's boundary by searching the other areas' files for this area's rules and

+ terms, as **Reading the Index** in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/architecture-index.md`

+ describes. Not by reading them whole

+ - "The Design-Check Brief" in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/subagents.md`

+ - to apply it inside the area **and** across its boundary, such as the same rule enforced in this area

+ and another

+ - to treat the index as a map only, and read the code before claiming anything

+ - to group related findings in the area into one candidate, so there are few

- to return only this, per candidate:

```markdown

### <title, plain language, no prefix>

- **Category:** duplicated knowledge | misplaced ownership | reinvented abstraction | crossed boundary

- **Size:** S | M | L

- every field under **What every finding states** in `systemic-refactoring.md`

```

- followed by one line listing hypotheses it checked and rejected, so the user can see what was

- ruled out.

+ then one line listing the hypotheses it checked and rejected, so the user sees what was ruled out.

- If `fable` is unavailable or the call is denied, run the same brief with the session's model and

- say so in the presentation.

+ If `fable` is unavailable, act as "When the Model Is Unavailable" in

+ `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/subagents.md` describes.

## Step 3: Confirm and Present the Findings

- Confirm each finding before presenting it, as **Evidence before action** in

- `systemic-refactoring.md` describes. A finding the code does not support is dropped, and is not

- offered for parking.

+ Confirm each finding before showing it, as **Evidence before action** in `systemic-refactoring.md`

+ describes. Drop a finding the code doesn't support. It isn't offered for parking.

- Number every confirmed candidate across all areas and show them grouped by area: one line per candidate, with its size, as

- **Showing a finding** in `systemic-refactoring.md` describes. Close with the dropped findings, each with

- the reason it was dropped and outside the numbering, the rejected hypotheses, and which areas had no

- findings.

+ Number every confirmed candidate across all areas, and show them grouped by area: one line per

+ candidate, with its size, as **Showing a finding** in `systemic-refactoring.md` describes. Close with

+ the dropped findings, each with its reason and outside the numbering. Then the rejected hypotheses,

+ and which areas had no findings.

- If no finding was found or confirmed, say so, list any dropped findings, and stop — that is a valid

+ If nothing was found or confirmed, say so, list any dropped findings, and stop. That is a valid

result.

## Step 4: Park the Opportunities

- Ask which of the numbered candidates shown in Step 3 to park:

- - **4 candidates or fewer** → multi-select `AskUserQuestion`: "Which of these should I save for later?" — one option per title

- - **more than 4** → `AskUserQuestion`: "Which of these should I save for later?"

- — options **All** / **None** / **By number** (the user types the numbers)

+ Ask which of the numbered candidates from Step 3 to park: "Which of these should I save for later?",

+ as "Asking Questions" in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/language.md` describes for picking from a

+ list.

Park each picked candidate as **Parking an opportunity** in `systemic-refactoring.md` describes. Its

- **Category** names the design smell. When a file with the same

- evidence already exists, show it and `AskUserQuestion`: "`<file>` looks like the same refactoring idea. What should I do?"

- — options **Skip** / **Replace it**.

+ **Category** names the design smell. When a file with the same evidence already exists, show it and

+ `AskUserQuestion`: "`<file>` looks like the same refactoring idea. What should I do?" — options

+ **Skip** / **Replace it**.

## Step 5: Report

- List each refactoring idea saved with its file path, each skipped candidate with the reason, each

- dropped finding with the reason, and any step that fell back from `fable` to the session model.

- Then end as "Ending a Skill" in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/language.md` describes. When no finding was

+ List each refactoring idea saved, with its file path. List each skipped candidate and each dropped

+ finding, with the reason, and any step that fell back from `fable` to the session's model. Then end

+ as "Ending a Skill" in `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/guidelines/language.md` describes. When nothing was

found, end the same way.

## STOP — Skill Complete

Do NOT refactor anything or edit the repository.