architecture▌

Detects anemic domain models, validates and refactors them into rich domain models, and enforces tactical DDD patterns (Entities, Value Objects, Aggregates, Domain Services, Domain Events). Use when the user asks to validate, review, or check domain models or DDD code; detect anemia; refactor domain objects; improve encapsulation; or mentions terms like "anemic model", "rich domain", "aggregate", "value object", "domain event", "ubiquitous language", "is this good DDD", "does this follow DDD", or "check my domain". Do NOT use for module or service boundary design, architectural decomposition, strategic DDD context mapping, or code outside the domain layer (DTOs, controllers, infrastructure adapters).

Runs a sequenced monolith-to-modular pipeline that sizes and inventories components, finds shared domain duplication, addresses flattening and hierarchy issues, analyzes coupling, then groups components into candidate domain-aligned units, with optional embedded DDD strategic analysis for bounded contexts. Use when asking how to split a monolith, size components before extraction, find duplicated domain logic, clean up module hierarchy, measure coupling between modules, or group components into services. Do NOT use for phased extraction roadmaps or prioritization without the prior analysis steps (use decomposition-planning-roadmap after this pipeline), end-to-end legacy migration strategy writeups (use legacy-migration-planner), pure infrastructure capacity sizing, or when you only need DDD without the structural pipeline (install domain-analysis standalone).

AI frontend specialist and design consultant that guides users through a structured discovery process before generating any code. Collects visual references, design tokens, typography, icons, layout preferences, and brand guidelines to ensure the final output matches the user's vision with high fidelity. Use when the user asks to build, design, create, or improve any frontend interface — websites, landing pages, dashboards, components, apps, emails, forms, modals, or any UI element. Also triggers on "build me a UI", "design a page", "create a component", "improve this layout", "make this look better", "frontend", "interface", "redesign", or when the user provides mockups, screenshots, or design references. Do NOT use for backend logic, API design, database schemas, or non-visual code tasks.

Technology-agnostic guidance for modular systems: bounded contexts, clear boundaries, composability, state isolation, explicit contracts, failure containment, scaffolding workflows, split/merge criteria, sub-units inside a context, and compliance review signals. Use when designing or reviewing module structure, service boundaries, package layout, cross-cutting dependencies, "how should we split this?", modularity assessments, coupling between domains, greenfield context design, or architecture discussions without assuming a specific framework, language, or repository layout. Do NOT use for executing the full Patterns 1–5 repo decomposition pipeline or per-pattern inventories (use modular-decomposition), phased extraction roadmaps as the main deliverable (use decomposition-planning-roadmap), or end-to-end legacy migration strategy (use legacy-migration-planner).

Groups existing components into logical business domains to plan service-based architecture. Use when asking "which components belong together?", "group these into services", "organize by domain", "component-to-domain mapping", or planning service extraction from an existing codebase. Do NOT use for identifying new domains from scratch (use domain-analysis) or analyzing coupling (use coupling-analysis).

Use when planning legacy system migrations, codebase modernization, monolith decomposition, microservices consolidation, cross-language rewrites, or framework upgrades. Invoke for strangler fig pattern, incremental migration strategy, or refactoring roadmaps. Do NOT use for domain analysis (use domain-analysis), component sizing (use component-identification-sizing), or step-by-step decomposition plans (use decomposition-planning-roadmap).

Maps business domains and suggests service boundaries in any codebase using DDD Strategic Design. Use when asking "what are the domains in this codebase?", "where should I draw service boundaries?", "identify bounded contexts", "classify subdomains", "DDD analysis", or analyzing domain cohesion. Do NOT use for grouping existing components into domains (use domain-identification-grouping) or dependency analysis (use coupling-analysis).

Creates step-by-step decomposition plans and migration roadmaps for breaking apart monolithic applications. Use when asking "what order should I extract services?", "plan my migration", "create a decomposition roadmap", "prioritize what to split", "monolith to microservices strategy", or tracking decomposition progress. Do NOT use for domain analysis (use domain-analysis) or component sizing (use component-identification-sizing).

Finds duplicate business logic spread across multiple components and suggests consolidation. Use when asking "where is this logic duplicated?", "find common code between services", "what can be consolidated?", "detect shared domain logic", or analyzing component overlap before refactoring. Do NOT use for code-level duplication detection (use linters) or dependency analysis (use coupling-analysis).

Maps architectural components in a codebase and measures their size to identify what should be extracted first. Use when asking "how big is each module?", "what components do I have?", "which service is too large?", "analyze codebase structure", "size my monolith", or planning where to start decomposing. Do NOT use for runtime performance sizing or infrastructure capacity planning.