Agent Native

ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder

This skill establishes measurable architecture requirements and constraints for a system by building a baseline document that captures business goals…

by levnikolaevichCommunityNot reviewed

Community author

Agents
Claude Code
License
MIT (permissive)
Pin
0ce8796pinned Oct 9, 2026
Context cost
about 2,500 tokenswhen the skill loads
GitHub stars
570on levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills
Scripts
None found

What it does

“Defines measurable architecture drivers and constraints before system design; edits architecture docs only.”
The author's description, from SKILL.md

Generated summary from the skill's own text

This skill establishes measurable architecture requirements and constraints for a system by building a baseline document that captures business goals, workload characteristics, quality targets, and operational constraints. The agent edits only approved architecture documentation and tracks evidence for each requirement through a structured checklist, classifying items as proven, cleared, or unproven without designing solutions or reviewing implementation code.

When to use it

  • Starting a new system design to define architecture-driving requirements upfront
  • Documenting quality targets, SLOs, and consistency requirements for existing services
  • Recording business scope, actors, data scale, and evolution triggers before major decisions
  • Consolidating scattered requirements into one source of truth for architecture decisions

When not to

  • Designing the system architecture or reviewing implementation against requirements
  • Auditing existing code or infrastructure for compliance with targets
  • Creating product requirements separate from architecture constraints

Install

These commands install from the publisher's repository and need no account.

skills CLI

npx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder

Installs from the repository's default branch, which may have changed since the commit we checked.

GitHub CLI 2.90 or later

gh skill install levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder@0ce87969906ac3c00947298ee2127d9e7cd466d8

Installs the commit we checked (0ce8796).

Copy by hand

Download the folder at 0ce8796 and put it in .claude/skills/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder for Claude Code and in .agents/skills/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder for Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode.

Skill folder on GitHub at 0ce8796

Copy for your agent

A prompt for any coding agent. It installs this skill from GitHub at the pinned commit, copies the files as they are, and runs nothing unless you ask.

Prompt

Install the agent skill "ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder" by levnikolaevich.

Source, pinned to commit 0ce87969906ac3c00947298ee2127d9e7cd466d8:
https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/tree/0ce87969906ac3c00947298ee2127d9e7cd466d8/plugins/architecture-suite/skills/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder

1. Download that folder at exactly this commit. Do not use the default branch.
2. Copy every file unchanged, keeping the folder structure, into .claude/skills/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder/ for Claude Code and .agents/skills/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder/ for Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode. Create the folders if they do not exist.
3. Do not edit the files, and do not run any script in the folder unless I ask you to.
4. When you are done, list the files you copied and where you put them.

Listing and checks: https://www.agentnative.dev/skills/levnikolaevich/ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder

SKILL.md at the pin

---
name: ln-21-system-design-baseline-builder
description: "Defines measurable architecture drivers and constraints before system design; edits architecture docs only."
---

# System Design Baseline Builder

**Goal:** Create or update one durable source of truth for the project's architecture-driving requirements and constraints. Change only the approved architecture document; do not design the solution, review a plan, audit implementation, edit product code, or invent missing targets.

**Execution contract:** The checklist defines completion. Track each item internally as `PENDING`, `PROVEN` with evidence, `CLEARED` with evidence its condition is absent, or `UNPROVEN` with a gap; reading, delegation, tool failure, a zero exit status, or a self-reported success is not proof; only the observed outcome is. Reconcile after each section. Before returning, resolve all `PENDING`, count only `PROVEN` and `CLEARED`, and apply verdict and approval rules to every gap.
Preserve intent, scope, and existing authorization. Continue authorized work; ask only for consequential unresolved choices or required external approval. When no one can answer during the run, state the exact question and apply the skill's verdict for the remaining gap instead of waiting or guessing. Scale depth to material risk without skipping checks. Preserve dependency and safety order; otherwise choose an appropriate verification method.
Accept equivalent user or repository evidence; no other skill, named artifact, or complete lifecycle is required. Preserve source requirement and decision IDs. Bind reused evidence to relevant source versions, dirty changes, configuration, and environment; invalidate only affected claims.
On continuation, reconcile task, authorization, current state, and unresolved evidence. For long work, return a compact continuation record or update an already authorized artifact; read-only skills do not persist it. Distinguish artifact readiness, verified behavior, and external-action authority.
Prepare authorized work before required approval. If blocked by an instruction, cite its exact source and unresolved boundary; do not invent approval gates from caution.


## Tool Routing

| Need | Preferred capability | Fallback |
|---|---|---|
| Repository rules and document conventions | Native file reads plus focused search | User-provided convention with an explicit limitation |
| Existing requirements and architecture artifacts | Narrow repository search and direct reads | Conversation evidence marked with its source |
| Current workload or service evidence | Metrics, dashboards, logs, manifests, or checked-in reports | Mark `UNKNOWN`; never manufacture production numbers |
| Current external limits or standards | Official documentation or specifications | Mark the claim `UNVERIFIED` |
| Document mutation | Minimal patch to the approved Markdown artifact | Return `BLOCKED` if no safe writable path is authorized |

Use external research only when a time-sensitive fact changes a constraint. Do not browse for values that must come from product owners, operators, the repository, or measured workload.

## Artifact Rules

- Prefer an existing unambiguous architecture-requirements document.
- Otherwise use `docs/architecture/system-design-baseline.md`.
- Read before writing, preserve unrelated content, and update facts in place instead of creating parallel truth.
- Classify applicability separately as `APPLICABLE` or `NOT_APPLICABLE`, with evidence for exclusions.
- Rank each applicable item as `DRIVER`, `SUPPORTING`, or `INFORMATIONAL`.
- Classify evidence separately as `CONFIRMED`, `ASSUMED`, or `UNKNOWN`.
- Separate observed current values, required targets, hard limits, and future evolution triggers.
- Express quality attributes through observable scenarios and response measures; record undecided targets as missing decisions rather than inventing numbers.
- Treat the baseline as versioned project knowledge, not an immutable promise.

## Checklist

### 1. Establish Scope and Destination

- [ ] Resolve the project, business outcome, intended readers, approved documentation scope, and language.
- [ ] Read applicable repository instructions and inspect Git state so unrelated changes remain untouched.
- [ ] Search for existing requirement, architecture, SLO, recovery, security, cost, and ownership documents.
- [ ] Select one canonical artifact: reuse a clear equivalent or choose the default path; explain why no duplicate will be created.
- [ ] Return `BLOCKED` if the destination is ambiguous and choosing one could split project truth.

### 2. Build the Evidence Ledger

- [ ] Collect business goals, actors, journeys, scope, non-goals, and decision horizon with their sources and confidence for the driver analysis; do not create a second context inventory.
- [ ] Record sources for current workload, data volume, service behavior, platform limits, and existing commitments.
- [ ] Separate repository facts from stakeholder choices and estimates.
- [ ] Detect contradictions between documents, code, configuration, and stated requirements; preserve both claims until resolved.
- [ ] Ask only for choices whose absence materially changes architecture; mark all other gaps `UNKNOWN`.

### 3. Define and Prioritize Architecture Drivers

- [ ] **Business and scope:** Record actors, critical journeys, business horizon, scope, non-goals, and externally committed outcomes.
- [ ] **Demand and data scale:** Record current and target users, rates, concurrency, payloads, growth, retention, and forecast horizon where relevant.
- [ ] **User-observable service quality:** Define SLIs and SLOs for availability, latency, throughput, error rate, correctness, or freshness with measurement windows.
- [ ] **Data semantics and recovery:** Define consistency, ordering, idempotency, reconciliation, durability, backup, RTO, RPO, and acceptable data loss at affected boundaries.
- [ ] **Security, privacy, and compliance:** Define trust boundaries, data classification, residency, access, audit, and destructive-action constraints.
- [ ] **Operations and economics:** Define ownership, operational capacity, cost envelope, supported regions, delivery cadence, and platform or vendor constraints.
- [ ] **Evolution:** Record thresholds, business events, or evidence that justify revisiting an assumption, target, or deferred capability.
- [ ] Separate applicability, criticality, and evidence status; do not use `UNKNOWN` to mean unimportant or `NOT_APPLICABLE`.
- [ ] Prioritize the few scenarios most likely to shape architecture and express each as source/stimulus/environment/artifact/response/measure.

### 4. Write the Baseline

- [ ] Create or update the artifact with: identity and status; business context; scope and non-goals; critical scenarios; workload and data; quality targets; recovery; consistency; security; cost and operations; constraints; assumptions and unknowns; review triggers.
- [ ] Give material parameters their theme, applicability, criticality, evidence status, value/range, source, owner, as-of date, and review trigger. State shared metadata once with explicit inheritance; use `UNKNOWN` for missing ownership or values.
- [ ] Keep calculations reproducible and label estimates separately from observed measurements.
- [ ] Link shared architecture artifacts only by repository path or document title; never require a particular workflow or tool.
- [ ] Preserve historical context needed to understand changed requirements instead of silently rewriting prior commitments.

### 5. Validate and Report

- [ ] Re-read the written artifact and verify that no unknown was converted into a confident fact.
- [ ] Check that targets are measurable, internally consistent, and proportionate to the evidenced business horizon.
- [ ] Check that every architecture-critical gap has an owner or exact next evidence action.
- [ ] Link architecture drivers to their source product requirements; preserve the product source as owner of functional rules rather than copying a second requirements baseline.
- [ ] Use `READY` only when the baseline is usable for decisions and no material unknown lacks a safe handling rule; use `INCOMPLETE` for a useful artifact with consequential open drivers; use `BLOCKED` when scope, authority, or destination prevents safe creation.

## Self-Check

- [ ] **Reconcile before returning.** Check item-level evidence, requirement coverage, contradictions, scope, verdict, and applicable cleanup. Correct the report or authorized artifacts. Reuse valid evidence; do not automatically rescan the repository or rerun successful commands. Repeat checks only for relevant changes, failures, or unresolved evidence. Disclose remaining gaps.

## Output Contract

Report in the user's language, in this order; label all five fields and state each fact once. Use controlled plain language: one fact per sentence, usually under 20 words, active voice, and one term per concept, with no synonyms for verdicts, IDs, or states. Small results may use one line per field; omit empty tables and do not copy linked artifacts:

1. **Result:** The exact skill-specific verdict token first, then the supported outcome.
2. **Scope:** Reviewed/changed scope, exclusions, baseline, and material assumptions.
3. **Evidence:** Skill-specific fields below; distinguish facts, inferences, and unverified claims. Link artifacts; use tables when useful.
4. **Verification:** Checks/results, unavailable evidence, and applicable cleanup/external state.
5. **Completion:** `Checklist: X/Y complete`; `Incomplete: None` or each `UNPROVEN` item's reason, outcome impact, and exact next action; residual risks and required decisions.

**Skill-specific evidence:** Artifact path, established drivers and prioritized quality scenarios, applicable constraints, and changed sections. The artifact owns the driver register: theme/parameter, applicability, criticality, evidence status, value/measure, source/owner, as-of date, and review trigger. Summarize only decision-changing gaps; do not copy the register into the response.

From levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills at 0ce8796, shown as plain text under its license: MIT (permissive). The license text is in LICENSE.

View SKILL.md on GitHub at 0ce8796

Files

1 file, 10 KB in total. Each file has a sha256 in the pin's manifest; the first 12 characters are shown.

Skill folder on GitHub at 0ce8796
All Docs and writing skills
  • n8n-docs-assistant

    This skill answers questions about n8n configuration, setup, credentials, nodes, and troubleshooting by retrieving information from current n8n documentation.

    by n8nOfficial publisher

    Claude Code, Codex, Cursor +3 · about 450 tokens · pinned 6 days ago

  • algodocs-automation

    This skill automates Algodocs document processing tasks through Composio's toolkit via the Rube MCP server.

    by ComposioOfficial publisher

    Claude Code, Codex, Cursor +3 · about 690 tokens · pinned 6 days ago

  • remotion-docs

    This skill enables agents to search and retrieve Remotion documentation via the Algolia API and fetch pages as Markdown.

    by RemotionOfficial publisher

    Claude Code, Codex, Cursor +3 · about 320 tokens · pinned 6 days ago

  • remotion-docs

    This skill searches the Remotion documentation using the Algolia API and retrieves documentation pages as Markdown.

    by RemotionOfficial publisher

    Claude Code, Codex, Cursor +3 · about 320 tokens · pinned 6 days ago

  • receipts

    This skill generates a personal Claude Code usage report from local session transcripts stored in ~/.claude/projects, mining activity across projects without…

    by AnthropicOfficial publisher

    Contains scripts

    Claude Code · about 4.1K tokens · pinned 6 days ago

  • solo

    This skill enables an agent to work through a single difficult mathematics problem independently within one session.

    by AnthropicOfficial publisher

    Claude Code · about 1.4K tokens · pinned 6 days ago

The skills listed here are third-party software, collected from public GitHub repositories as a catalog of recent skills and provided as is. Agent Native does not write or control them and is not responsible for any harm, loss or damage caused by installing or using them. Labels and checks describe what we saw at one commit and are not a guarantee. Read a skill's files before you run it. Terms of use