← Plugin catalog
Developer Tools

CodebaseDesign

Saul Martí v2.0.0

Publisher description

From the marketplace listing

Design or improve module interfaces, seams, depth, locality, and testability; optionally scan a codebase for architectural deepening opportunities.

Language: English · Automatically detected from descriptions.

Files & skills

File archives

Plugin package32 files · 43.6 KBBrowse files →
Skill instructions
codebase-design6.33 KB

View saved version →

---
name: codebase-design
description: Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# Codebase Design

Design **deep modules**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface. Use this language and these principles wherever code is being designed or restructured. The aim is leverage for callers, locality for maintainers, and testability for everyone.

## Glossary

Use these terms exactly: don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.

**Module**: anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.

**Interface**: everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow, they refer only to the type-level surface).

**Implementation**: what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.

**Depth**: leverage at the interface. The amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.

**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_: a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).

**Adapter**: a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).

**Leverage**: what callers get from depth. More capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.

**Locality**: what maintainers get from depth. Change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.

## Deep vs shallow

**Deep module** = small interface + lots of implementation:

```
┌─────────────────────┐
│   Small Interface   │  ← Few methods, simple params
├─────────────────────┤
│                     │
│  Deep Implementation│  ← Complex logic hidden
│                     │
└─────────────────────┘
```

**Shallow module** = large interface + little implementation (avoid):

```
┌─────────────────────────────────┐
│       Large Interface           │  ← Many methods, complex params
├─────────────────────────────────┤
│  Thin Implementation            │  ← Just passes through
└─────────────────────────────────┘
```

When designing an interface, ask:

- Can I reduce the number of methods?
- Can I simplify the parameters?
- Can I hide more complexity inside?

## Principles

- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts; they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
- **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
- **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.

## Designing for testability

Good interfaces make testing natural:

1. **Accept dependencies, don't create them.**

   ```typescript
   // Testable
   function processOrder(order, paymentGateway) {}

   // Hard to test
   function processOrder(order) {
     const gateway = new StripeGateway();
   }
   ```

2. **Return results, don't produce side effects.**

   ```typescript
   // Testable
   function calculateDiscount(cart): Discount {}

   // Hard to test
   function applyDiscount(cart): void {
     cart.total -= discount;
   }
   ```

3. **Small surface area.** Fewer methods = fewer tests needed. Fewer params = simpler test setup.

## Relationships

- A **Module** has exactly one **Interface** (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
- **Depth** is a property of a **Module**, measured against its **Interface**.
- A **Seam** is where a **Module**'s **Interface** lives.
- An **Adapter** sits at a **Seam** and satisfies the **Interface**.
- **Depth** produces **Leverage** for callers and **Locality** for maintainers.

## Rejected framings

- **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow: interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
- **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.

## Going deeper

- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies**, see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
- **Exploring alternative interfaces**, see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

Referenced files: 3

entry-codebase-design817 Bytes

View saved version →

---
name: entry-codebase-design
description: "Use whenever the CodebaseDesign plugin is selected. Route the request to the intended bundled workflow while keeping all dependencies internal to this plugin."
---

# CodebaseDesign

This is the public entry workflow for this plugin. The bundled skills below are dependencies, not competing entry points.

## Mandatory routing

Use codebase-design for a specific module interface or seam question, improve-codebase-architecture for a repo-wide scan, and setup-ts-deep-modules only when explicitly requested.

If a bundled workflow calls another bundled skill, invoke that local bundled copy. Never require the user to install another plugin to complete this workflow.

## Bundled workflows

- `codebase-design`
- `improve-codebase-architecture`
- `setup-ts-deep-modules`
improve-codebase-architecture5.85 KB

View saved version →

---
name: improve-codebase-architecture
description: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# Improve Codebase Architecture

Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities**: refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.

This command is _informed_ by the project's domain model and built on a shared design vocabulary:

- Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion, and don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
- The domain language in `CONTEXT.md` gives names to good seams; ADRs in `docs/adr/` record decisions this command should not re-litigate.

## Process

### 1. Explore

**Scope before you scan: YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:

- If the user named a direction (a module, a subsystem, a pain point), take it, and skip the inference below.
- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots, the files and areas that keep coming up, and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.

Read the project's domain glossary (`CONTEXT.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.

Then spawn a sub-agent to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics; explore organically and note where you experience friction:

- Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small modules?
- Where are modules **shallow**, with an interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
- Where have pure functions been extracted just for testability, but the real bugs hide in how they're called (no **locality**)?
- Where do tightly-coupled modules leak across their seams?
- Which parts of the codebase are untested, or hard to test through their current interface?

Apply the **deletion test** to anything you suspect is shallow: would deleting it concentrate complexity, or just move it? A "yes, concentrates" is the signal you want.

### 2. Present candidates as an HTML report

Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from `$TMPDIR`, falling back to `/tmp` (or `%TEMP%` on Windows), and write to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html` so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user (`xdg-open <path>` on Linux, `open <path>` on macOS, `start <path>` on Windows) and tell them the absolute path.

The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals: use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.

For each candidate, render a card with:

- **Files**: which files/modules are involved
- **Problem**: why the current architecture is causing friction
- **Solution**: plain English description of what would change
- **Benefits**: explained in terms of locality and leverage, and how tests would improve
- **Before / After diagram**: side-by-side, custom-drawn, illustrating the shallowness and the deepening
- **Recommendation strength**: one of `Strong`, `Worth exploring`, `Speculative`, rendered as a badge

End the report with a **Top recommendation** section: which candidate you'd tackle first and why.

**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."

**ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007, but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.

See [HTML-REPORT.md](HTML-REPORT.md) for the full HTML scaffold, diagram patterns, and styling guidance.

Do NOT propose interfaces yet. After the file is written, ask the user: "Which of these would you like to explore?"

### 3. Grilling loop

Once the user picks a candidate, call the Skill tool with "grilling" to walk the decision tree with them: constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.

Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize; call the Skill tool with "domain-modeling" to keep the domain model current as you go:

- **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `CONTEXT.md`?** Add the term to `CONTEXT.md`. Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
- **Sharpening a fuzzy term during the conversation?** Update `CONTEXT.md` right there.
- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing; skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.

Referenced files: 2

setup-ts-deep-modules7.37 KB

View saved version →

---
name: setup-ts-deep-modules
description: Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module, with implementation hidden in subfolders and reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# Setup TS Deep Modules

Make every package in this repo a **deep module**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. A package's public surface is its **entry points** (the files at the package root), and everything in its subfolders is hidden. This skill installs [dependency-cruiser](https://github.com/sverweij/dependency-cruiser) and the rules that make the entry points the only way in, then proves the rules bite.

For the vocabulary (deep module, interface, seam, depth), call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" and use its language throughout.

## The shape this enforces

```
src/packages/
  <name>/
    index.ts        ← an entry point (public). Import this from outside.
    client.ts       ← another entry point. Packages may expose SEVERAL.
    lib/            ← implementation: hidden from outside, free to import each other.
    tests/          ← co-located tests + fixtures (a subfolder, so private).
```

The public surface is the package's **root files**, not one designated `index.ts`. By convention implementation lives in `lib/` and tests in `tests/`, giving every package the same two-folder shape. The rule itself is general, though: *anything* in *any* subfolder is private, so you never extend the config to add a folder.

Four rules, all `error`:

1. **Entry-point boundary**: code outside a package (app code or another package) may import only that package's entry points (its root files), never anything in its subfolders.
2. **Intra-package freedom**: a package's own files import each other freely.
3. **Tests through the entry points**: files under `<pkg>/tests/` may import any package's entry points and their own `tests/` fixtures, but never any package's subfolder internals (not even their own). Integration tests across packages are fine; deep imports are not.
4. **No cycles**: no dependency cycles.

**Entry points, not a barrel.** Because the public surface is *every* root file, a package can expose several small entry points (`index.ts`, `client.ts`, `server.ts`) instead of funnelling everything through one giant `index.ts`. Barrel files that re-export a whole subtree are discouraged; keep entry points small and hide implementation in subfolders.

Layering (which packages may depend on which) is a *different* concern and is left as a commented stub in the config for this repo to fill in.

## Steps

### 1. Detect the environment

- **Package manager**: `pnpm-lock.yaml` → pnpm, `yarn.lock` → yarn, `bun.lockb` → bun, else npm. Use it for every command below (`pnpm`/`yarn`/`npm run`/`bunx`).
- **Packages root**: if `src/` exists use `src/packages`, else `packages`. Confirm the choice with the user if the repo already has a different obvious convention.
- **Existing config**: check for a `.dependency-cruiser.*` file. If one exists, do **not** overwrite it: merge the four rules and the options in, and tell the user what you added.

**Done when:** package manager, packages root, and existing-config status are all known.

### 2. Install dependency-cruiser

Install `dependency-cruiser` as a devDependency with the detected package manager.

**Done when:** `dependency-cruiser` is in `devDependencies`.

### 3. Write the config

Copy [`dependency-cruiser.config.cjs`](./dependency-cruiser.config.cjs) to the repo root as `.dependency-cruiser.cjs`. Set `PACKAGES_ROOT` to the root detected in step 1. The rules are path-depth based and extension-agnostic, so nothing else needs adapting.

**Done when:** `.dependency-cruiser.cjs` exists with the correct `PACKAGES_ROOT`, and the four forbidden rules are present.

### 4. Wire it into the checks

- Add a `lint:boundaries` script: `depcruise <packages-root>` (or `depcruise src`).
- Fold it into the repo's umbrella check command, the one that already runs typecheck (e.g. a `check` / `ci` / `validate` script). Do **not** touch `tsconfig` or add path aliases.
- If there is no umbrella script, add `lint:boundaries` and tell the user to include it in CI.

**Done when:** `lint:boundaries` exists and runs as part of the same command as typecheck.

### 5. Scaffold the example package

Create a committed `<packages-root>/example/` as a copy-me template:

- `index.ts` is an entry point. Export one function that delegates to an internal file (so the package is visibly *deep*, not a pass-through).
- `lib/impl.ts`: an internal file in a **subfolder**, imported by `index.ts`, not reachable from outside.
- `tests/example.test.ts` imports **only** `../index` (an entry point) and asserts against the public function.

Tell the user this is a starter template to copy or delete.

**Done when:** the example package exists, exposes its behaviour through a root entry point, and hides `impl` in a subfolder.

### 6. Prove the rules bite

This is the completion criterion for the whole skill: a config that doesn't fail on a violation is worthless.

1. Run `lint:boundaries`. It must **pass** on the clean example.
2. Temporarily add a deep import to `tests/example.test.ts` (e.g. `import { thing } from "../lib/impl"`). Run `lint:boundaries` again; it must **fail** with `tests-through-entrypoints`.
3. Revert the deep import. Run once more, and it must **pass**.

**Done when:** you have observed a pass, then a fail on the deep import, then a pass again. If step 2 does not fail, the rules are not wired correctly, so fix before finishing.

### 7. Document the convention

Write a `README.md` **in the packages folder** (`<packages-root>/README.md`, next to the packages it governs) covering: the `src/packages/<name>/` layout (entry points at the root, `lib/` for implementation, `tests/` for tests), "import only through a package's entry points (its root files)", and how to run `lint:boundaries`. **Discourage barrel files** explicitly: expose several small entry points instead of re-exporting a whole subtree through one index. Keep it to the copy-me snippet plus the four rules in one paragraph each.

Then add a **context pointer** to it from the repo's agent-instructions file (`CLAUDE.md` if present, else `AGENTS.md`, creating `AGENTS.md` if neither exists). One line is enough, e.g. `Packages are deep modules: see [src/packages/README.md](./src/packages/README.md) before adding or importing one.` This is what makes an agent discover the boundary rule instead of tripping over it.

**Done when:** `<packages-root>/README.md` exists and discourages barrels, and the repo's `CLAUDE.md`/`AGENTS.md` links to it.

## Notes

- The config's `$1` back-references (dependency-cruiser's group matching) are what let a package reach its own internals while outsiders can't. Don't flatten them into separate per-package rules.
- Public vs private is decided by **depth**: a package's root files are entry points; anything in a subfolder is private. The conventional subfolders are `lib/` (implementation) and `tests/`, but the rule doesn't hardcode them: any subfolder is private, so a new folder never needs a config change. Adding an entry point is just adding a root file (no barrel).
- Packages are **flat**: one tier of immediate children under the root. A package's internals may nest as deep as you like; a package may not contain another package.
- Use `.cjs` (not `.js`) so the config's `module.exports` works even in `"type": "module"` repos.

Referenced files: 2

Package details

Publisher declarations from the archived package. These are separate from our research and the live service's terms.

Package license
MIT
Package author
Saul Martí
Keywords
engineering-suite, codebase-design, skills

Declared capabilities

  • Design deep module seams

Package observed Sep 30, 2026.

Technical details
First seen
Sep 30, 2026 · 22:02 UTC
Last seen
Oct 1, 2026 · 12:00 UTC
Collection status
Collected

plugins_6aa3096d77ec8191a533f1401a8c29f1

Download plugin data (JSON)