smithery/Shakes-tzd

ctx:architect

Systematic architecture analysis following Understand → Research → Specify → Decompose → Plan workflow.

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/Shakes-tzd --skill ctxarchitect

Summary

  • Systematic architecture analysis following Understand → Research → Specify → Decompose → Plan workflow.
  • Use for system design, solution evaluation, build vs buy decisions, and task decomposition.
  • Activate when users say "design", "architect", "break down", "best approach", or "should I build".

Similar popular skills

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

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/Shakes-tzd.

npx skills add smithery/Shakes-tzd

Browse all from smithery/Shakes-tzd

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 Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 4,780 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 322 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

CTX:Architect - Structured Design Workflow

Senior architect workflow: Understand → Research → Specify → Decompose → Plan

Core Workflow

1. Understand the Problem

Extract essentials:

  • Core problem (what's the real need?)
  • Constraints (time, budget, skills, existing systems)
  • Success criteria (what does "done" look like?)
  • Assumptions (make implicit explicit)

If unclear, ask:

  • "What problem does this solve?"
  • "What systems must it integrate with?"
  • "Expected scale/volume?"
  • "Must-haves vs. nice-to-haves?"

2. Research Existing Solutions

Use WebSearch to find:

  • Existing tools/libraries: "best [tech] for [problem] 2025"
  • Implementation patterns: "[problem] implementation examples"
  • Known challenges: "[problem] pitfalls"
  • Comparisons: "[tool A] vs [tool B]"

Evaluate each solution:

  • Maturity (active? community?)
  • Fit (solves 80%+?)
  • Integration (works with stack?)
  • Cost (license, hosting)
  • Risk (lock-in, learning curve)

Output: Comparison table with pros/cons

3. Develop Specifications

Structure:

## Problem Statement
[1-2 sentences]

## Requirements
- [ ] Functional (High/Med/Low priority)
- [ ] Performance (metrics, scale)
- [ ] Security (requirements)

## Constraints
- Technical: [stack, systems]
- Resources: [time, budget, team]

## Success Criteria
- [Measurable outcomes]

If specs missing, ask:

  • Functional: "What must it do?" "Inputs/outputs?" "Edge cases?"
  • Non-functional: "How many users?" "Response time?" "Uptime?"
  • Technical: "Current stack?" "Team skills?" "Deployment constraints?"

4. Decompose into Tasks

Process:

  1. Identify major components
  2. Break into 1-3 day tasks
  3. Classify: Independent | Sequential | Parallel-ready
  4. Map dependencies

Dependency mapping:

Task A (indep) ────┐
Task B (indep) ────┼──> Task D (needs A,B,C)
Task C (indep) ────┘
Task E (needs D) ──> Task F (needs E)

For each task:

  • Prerequisites (what must exist first?)
  • Outputs (what does it produce?)
  • Downstream (what depends on it?)
  • Parallelizable? (can run with others?)

5. Create Execution Plan

Phase structure:

## Phase 1: Foundation (Parallel)
- [ ] Task A - Infrastructure
- [ ] Task B - Data models
- [ ] Task C - CI/CD

## Phase 2: Core (Sequential after Phase 1)
- [ ] Task D - Auth (needs A,B)
- [ ] Task E - API (needs B)

## Phase 3: Features (Mixed)
- [ ] Task F - Feature 1 (needs D,E)
- [ ] Task G - Feature 2 (needs D,E) ← Parallel with F

Per task include:

  • Description (what to build)
  • Dependencies (prerequisites)
  • Effort (S/M/L)
  • Owner (who can execute)
  • Done criteria (how to verify)
  • Risks (what could fail)

Build vs. Buy Decision

Factor Build Buy
Uniqueness Core differentiator Common problem
Fit Tools don't match 80%+ match
Control Need full control Standard OK
Timeline Have time Need speed
Expertise Team has skills Steep curve
Maintenance Can maintain Want support

Hybrid: Buy infrastructure/common features, build differentiation


Critical Success Factors

✅ Research first (don't reinvent) ✅ Make dependencies explicit (enable parallel work) ✅ Ask direct questions (get clarity fast) ✅ Document trade-offs (explain decisions) ✅ Think in phases (iterative delivery) ✅ Consider team (match to capabilities)


Activation Triggers

  • "Design a system for..."
  • "How should I architect..."
  • "Break down this project..."
  • "What's the best approach..."
  • "Help me plan..."
  • "Should I build or buy..."

Integration with Contextune

This skill is invoked automatically when Contextune detects /ctx:design command.

Workflow:

  1. User types: "design a caching system"
  2. Contextune detects: /ctx:design
  3. Hook augments: "You can use your ctx:architect skill..."
  4. Claude should ask: "I detected this is a design task. Would you like me to use the ctx:architect skill (structured workflow) or proceed directly?"
  5. User chooses, workflow proceeds

Output: Structured specifications, researched alternatives, executable plan with dependencies