improve-codebase-architecture

Overview of improve-codebase-architecture skill

What this skill does

improve-codebase-architecture helps you find architectural friction and turn shallow code into deeper modules with clearer seams, better testability, and stronger AI-navigability. It is most useful when you need an improve-codebase-architecture skill that can review a codebase through the lens of module depth, not just style cleanup.

Who should use it

Use this for refactoring-heavy work, architecture reviews, and codebases where coupling, unclear interfaces, or scattered logic are slowing change. It fits teams that already care about design vocabulary, especially when the codebase has CONTEXT.md and docs/adr/ decisions you want the skill to honor.

What makes it different

The skill is opinionated about language: it prefers terms like module, interface, seam, adapter, depth, and locality. That matters because it keeps recommendations consistent and actionable, instead of drifting into generic “clean up the service” advice.

How to Use improve-codebase-architecture skill

Install and first reads

Use the improve-codebase-architecture install flow from the mattpocock/skills collection, then read SKILL.md first. After that, inspect LANGUAGE.md, DEEPENING.md, and INTERFACE-DESIGN.md before applying it to your own repository. If your repo has CONTEXT.md or docs/adr/, read those early because they shape what counts as a good change.

How to frame a good prompt

Give the skill a concrete architecture problem, not a vague request for “improvements.” Strong input names the module area, the pain, and the constraints.

Good prompt:

• “Review src/billing/* for shallow modules and suggest deepening opportunities that preserve current behavior and reduce test complexity.”
• “Find refactoring candidates in the auth flow where a seam would improve locality without adding extra adapters.”
• “Assess whether packages/parser should be split or deepened for improve-codebase-architecture for Refactoring.”

Weak prompt:

• “Improve this repo.”
• “Make the architecture better.”

Practical workflow

Start with a narrow slice of the codebase, then ask for candidates, not final rewrites. The best improve-codebase-architecture usage pattern is: identify friction → name the shallow module → classify dependencies → choose a seam → propose the smallest change that increases depth. If the repo spans I/O, injected ports, or external services, tell the skill which dependencies are in-process, local-substitutable, remote-owned, or true external.

What to include in your input

Give file paths, current behavior, and any hard constraints such as “must keep tests green,” “cannot change public CLI flags,” or “must preserve ADR decisions.” If you want interface changes, say whether you want minimization, flexibility, or optimization for the common caller. That pushes the skill toward useful tradeoff analysis instead of generic refactor ideas.

improve-codebase-architecture skill FAQ

Is this better than a normal prompt?

Yes, when the task is architectural rather than cosmetic. A normal prompt can suggest cleanup, but improve-codebase-architecture is designed to reason in terms of depth, seams, adapters, and locality, which makes the output more useful for real refactoring.

When is it a poor fit?

Skip it if you only want naming fixes, formatting, or one-off bug repairs. It is also a weaker fit if you cannot share enough repo context to identify module interfaces, dependencies, and constraints.

Can beginners use it?

Yes, but only if they can point to a specific area of the codebase. Beginners get better results when they ask for a small, concrete slice and include the files or folders involved.

Does it work with any stack?

Mostly yes, because the skill is architecture-oriented rather than framework-specific. It is strongest when the repo has clear modules, tests, and documentation that describe design intent.

How to Improve improve-codebase-architecture skill

Provide stronger context

The biggest quality gain comes from naming the exact module or subsystem, plus what feels shallow about it. Include the current interface, the main dependencies, and whether the problem is testability, coupling, or unclear ownership.

Ask for candidates, then choose

Do not ask for a full rewrite first. Better improve-codebase-architecture usage is to request 2–4 deepening candidates with pros, cons, and seam options, then follow up on the best one. That keeps the first pass grounded in the repository instead of assumptions.

State the constraint that matters most

If your priority is “preserve behavior,” “minimize adapters,” or “keep the public interface stable,” say it explicitly. The skill can make different recommendations depending on whether you value leverage, migration cost, or interface simplicity.

Iterate with sharper evidence

After the first output, feed back the files that were misread, the dependencies that were missed, or the tests that are hardest to maintain. The skill improves when you narrow the problem to one module cluster and ask it to re-evaluate the seam with that evidence.