samber/cc-skills-golang

golang-dependency-injection

Comprehensive guide for dependency injection (DI) in Golang. Covers why DI matters (testability, loose coupling, separation of concerns, lifecycle management), manual constructor injection, and DI library comparison (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do). Use this skill when designing service architecture, setting up dependency injection, refactoring tightly coupled code, managing singletons or service factories, or when the user asks about inversion of control, service containers, o…

All-time #641 Trending #1552 Hot #5426 First seen Mar 22, 2026
8-week activity · all time api

Installation

$ npx skills add samber/cc-skills-golang --skill golang-dependency-injection

Summary

  • Comprehensive guide for dependency injection (DI) in Golang.
  • Covers why DI matters (testability, loose coupling, separation of concerns, lifecycle management), manual constructor injection, and DI library comparison (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do).
  • Use this skill when designing service architecture, setting up dependency injection, refactoring tightly coupled code, managing singletons or service factories, or when the user asks about inversion of control, service containers, or wiring dependencies in Go.
  • For a specific DI library, → See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-google-wire`, `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-uber-dig`, `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-uber-fx`, or `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do` skills.

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Security audits

Partner security reviews for this skill.

agent-trust-hub SAFE

Analyzed May 19, 2026

The skill is a legitimate guide for Go dependency injection, covering architectural best practices and the usage of established libraries such as Google Wire, Uber Fx, and Samber Do. No security issues were detected.

snyk LOW

Analyzed May 19, 2026

No issues detected.

socket Score 0.9000 · 0 alerts

Analyzed May 19, 2026

  • license 1
  • maintenance 1
  • quality 0.9
  • supply chain 1
  • vulnerability 1

0 alerts

Also in this package

Other skills from samber/cc-skills-golang · top by installs.

npx skills add samber/cc-skills-golang

Browse all from samber/cc-skills-golang

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 3.2K
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 3
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Version1.3.1
LicenseMIT
CompatibilityDesigned for Claude Code, Codex or similar harness, and for projects using Golang.
Allowed toolsRead Edit Write Glob Grep Bash(go:*) Bash(golangci-lint:*) Bash(git:*) Agent WebFetch mcp__context7__resolve-library-id mcp__context7__query-docs AskUserQuestion
Declared agents claude-code codex clawdbot
More metadata
author
samber
version
1.3.1
openclaw
{"emoji":"🔌","homepage":"https:\/\/github.com\/samber\/cc-skills-golang","requires":{"bins":["go"]},"install":[]}

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 13,045 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 782 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 37,000 installs

SKILL.md

Persona: You are a Go software architect. You guide teams toward testable, loosely coupled designs — you choose the simplest DI approach that solves the problem, and you never over-engineer.

Orchestration mode: Fan out the three sub-agents described in Refactor mode (global/init discovery, concrete-dependency mapping, service-locator detection) when refactoring a large coupled codebase toward dependency injection, and consolidate into one migration plan. On Claude Code, use ultracode to opt into multi-agent orchestration explicitly.

Modes:

  • Design mode (new project, new service, or adding a service to an existing DI setup): assess the existing dependency graph and lifecycle needs; recommend manual injection or a library from the decision table; then generate the wiring code.
  • Refactor mode (existing coupled code): use up to 3 parallel sub-agents — Agent 1 identifies global variables and init() service setup, Agent 2 maps concrete type dependencies that should become interfaces, Agent 3 locates service-locator anti-patterns (container passed as argument) — then consolidate findings and propose a migration plan.

Community default. A company skill that explicitly supersedes samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-dependency-injection skill takes precedence.

Dependency Injection in Go

Dependency injection (DI) means passing dependencies to a component rather than having it create or find them. In Go, this is how you build testable, loosely coupled applications — your services declare what they need, and the caller (or container) provides it.

This skill is not exhaustive. When using a DI library (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do), refer to the library's official documentation and code examples for current API signatures.

For interface-based design foundations (accept interfaces, return structs), see the samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill.

Best Practices Summary

  1. Dependencies MUST be injected via constructors — NEVER use global variables or init() for service setup
  2. Small projects (< 10 services) SHOULD use manual constructor injection — no library needed
  3. Interfaces MUST be defined where consumed, not where implemented — accept interfaces, return structs
  4. NEVER use global registries or package-level service locators
  5. The DI container MUST only exist at the composition root (main() or app startup) — NEVER pass the container as a dependency
  6. Prefer lazy initialization — only create services when first requested
  7. Use singletons for stateful services (DB connections, caches) and transients for stateless ones
  8. Mock at the interface boundary — DI makes this trivial
  9. Keep the dependency graph shallow — deep chains signal design problems
  10. Choose the right DI library for your project size and team — see the decision table below

Why Dependency Injection?

Problem without DI How DI solves it
Functions create their own dependencies Dependencies are injected — swap implementations freely
Testing requires real databases, APIs Pass mock implementations in tests
Changing one component breaks others Loose coupling via interfaces — components don't know each other's internals
Services initialized everywhere Centralized container manages lifecycle (singleton, factory, lazy)
All services loaded at startup Lazy loading — services created only when first requested
Global state and init() functions Explicit wiring at startup — predictable, debuggable

DI shines in applications with many interconnected services — HTTP servers, microservices, CLI tools with plugins. For a small script with 2-3 functions, manual wiring is fine. Don't over-engineer.

Manual Constructor Injection (No Library)

For small projects, pass dependencies through constructors. See [Manual DI examples](./references/manual-di.md) for a complete application example.

// ✓ Good — explicit dependencies, testable
type UserService struct {
    db     UserStore
    mailer Mailer
    logger *slog.Logger
}

func NewUserService(db UserStore, mailer Mailer, logger *slog.Logger) *UserService {
    return &UserService{db: db, mailer: mailer, logger: logger}
}

// main.go — manual wiring
func main() {
    logger := slog.Default()
    db := postgres.NewUserStore(connStr)
    mailer := smtp.NewMailer(smtpAddr)
    userSvc := NewUserService(db, mailer, logger)
    orderSvc := NewOrderService(db, logger)
    api := NewAPI(userSvc, orderSvc, logger)
    api.ListenAndServe(":8080")
}
// ✗ Bad — hardcoded dependencies, untestable
type UserService struct {
    db *sql.DB
}

func NewUserService() *UserService {
    db, _ := sql.Open("postgres", os.Getenv("DATABASE_URL")) // hidden dependency
    return &UserService{db: db}
}

Manual DI breaks down when:

  • You have 15+ services with cross-dependencies
  • You need lifecycle management (health checks, graceful shutdown)
  • You want lazy initialization or scoped containers
  • Wiring order becomes fragile and hard to maintain

DI Library Comparison

Go has three main approaches to DI libraries:

  • [google/wire examples](./references/google-wire.md) — Compile-time code generation
  • [uber-go/dig + fx examples](./references/uber-dig-fx.md) — Reflection-based framework
  • [samber/do examples](./references/samber-do.md) — Generics-based, no code generation

Decision Table

Criteria Manual google/wire uber-go/dig + fx samber/do
Project size Small (< 10 services) Medium-Large Large Any size
Type safety Compile-time Compile-time (codegen) Runtime (reflection) Compile-time (generics)
Code generation None Required (wire_gen.go) None None
Reflection None None Yes None
API style N/A Provider sets + build tags Struct tags + decorators Simple, generic functions
Lazy loading Manual N/A (all eager) Built-in (fx) Built-in
Singletons Manual Built-in Built-in Built-in
Transient/factory Manual Manual Built-in Built-in
Scopes/modules Manual Provider sets Module system (fx) Built-in (hierarchical)
Health checks Manual Manual Manual Built-in interface
Graceful shutdown Manual Manual Built-in (fx) Built-in interface
Container cloning N/A N/A N/A Built-in
Debugging Print statements Compile errors fx.Visualize() ExplainInjector(), web interface
Go version Any Any Any 1.18+ (generics)
Learning curve None Medium High Low

Quick Comparison: Wiring Style

The same graph — Config -> Database -> UserStore -> UserService -> API — wired by hand and by a container. The contrast is what the wiring code encodes: an ordered call sequence you maintain, versus a set of providers the container orders for you.

// Manual — you own the order; adding a dependency means editing every call site downstream
cfg := NewConfig()
db := NewDatabase(cfg)
store := NewUserStore(db)
svc := NewUserService(store)
api := NewAPI(svc)
api.Run()
// No shutdown hooks, health checks, or lazy loading — add them yourself

// Container (samber/do) — order is derived from the constructor signatures
i := do.New()
do.Provide(i, NewConfig)
do.Provide(i, NewDatabase)
do.Provide(i, NewUserStore)
do.Provide(i, NewUserService)
api := do.MustInvoke[*API](i)
api.Run()
defer i.Shutdown() // shutdown and health checks come from the container

google/wire and uber-go/fx express the same graph differently: wire generates the manual sequence above at build time from a wire.Build provider list (cleanup via func() returned by providers, no lifecycle hooks), while fx registers providers with fx.Provide and resolves them by reflection at runtime with OnStart/OnStop hooks. Full wiring examples for each: [google/wire](./references/google-wire.md), [uber-go/dig + fx](./references/uber-dig-fx.md), [samber/do](./references/samber-do.md).

Testing with DI

DI makes testing straightforward — inject mocks instead of real implementations:

// Define a mock
type MockUserStore struct {
    users map[string]*User
}

func (m *MockUserStore) FindByID(ctx context.Context, id string) (*User, error) {
    u, ok := m.users[id]
    if !ok {
        return nil, ErrNotFound
    }
    return u, nil
}

// Test with manual injection
func TestUserService_GetUser(t *testing.T) {
    mock := &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    }
    svc := NewUserService(mock, nil, slog.Default())

    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    if err != nil {
        t.Fatalf("unexpected error: %v", err)
    }
    if user.Name != "Alice" {
        t.Errorf("got %q, want %q", user.Name, "Alice")
    }
}

Testing with samber/do — Clone and Override

Container cloning creates an isolated copy where you override only the services you need to mock:

func TestUserService_WithDo(t *testing.T) {
    // Create a test injector with mock implementation
    testInjector := do.New()

    // Provide the mock UserStore interface
    do.OverrideValue[UserStore](testInjector, &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    })

    // Provide other real services as needed
    do.Provide[*slog.Logger](testInjector, func(i *do.Injector) (*slog.Logger, error) {
        return slog.Default(), nil
    })

    svc := do.MustInvoke[*UserService](testInjector)
    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    // ... assertions
}

This is particularly useful for integration tests where you want most services to be real but need to mock a specific boundary (database, external API, mailer).

When to Adopt a DI Library

Signal Action
< 10 services, simple dependencies Stay with manual constructor injection
10-20 services, some cross-cutting concerns Consider a DI library
20+ services, lifecycle management needed Strongly recommended
Need health checks, graceful shutdown Use a library with built-in lifecycle support
Team unfamiliar with DI concepts Start manual, migrate incrementally

Common Mistakes

Mistake Fix
Global variables as dependencies Pass through constructors or DI container
init() for service setup Explicit initialization in main() or container
Depending on concrete types Accept interfaces at consumption boundaries
Passing the container everywhere (service locator) Inject specific dependencies, not the container
Deep dependency chains (A->B->C->D->E) Flatten — most services should depend on repositories and config directly
Creating a new container per request One container per application; use scopes for request-level isolation

Cross-References

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do skill for detailed samber/do usage patterns
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill for interface design and composition
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-testing skill for testing with dependency injection
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-project-layout skill for DI initialization placement

References