Architecture Review

Review code changes for architectural quality and consistency with established patterns.

Philosophy

Consistency over perfection. A consistent codebase is more maintainable than one with scattered "perfect" solutions. Follow existing patterns unless there's a strong reason to change them.

Dependencies flow inward. Core business logic shouldn't depend on external frameworks or infrastructure. Check that dependencies point in the right direction.

Explicit boundaries. Clear separation between layers (API, business logic, data access) makes code easier to test and modify.

Before You Start

1. •Read docs/ARCHITECTURE.md to understand the project's established patterns
2. •Note the key architectural decisions and conventions
3. •Review changes in context of these patterns

Checklist

Pattern Consistency

• • Follows Existing Patterns: Does new code match how similar features are implemented?
• • Naming Conventions: Do files, functions, and variables follow project conventions?
• • File Organization: Are files in the expected locations per project structure?
• • API Patterns: Do new endpoints follow established API design patterns?

Separation of Concerns

• • Single Responsibility: Does each module/function do one thing well?
• • Layer Violations: Is business logic leaking into API handlers or UI components?
• • Data Access: Is database access isolated to appropriate layers?
• • Side Effects: Are side effects (I/O, state changes) isolated and explicit?

Dependency Management

• • Dependency Direction: Do dependencies flow toward the core, not away?
• • Circular Dependencies: Are there any new circular imports?
• • Appropriate Coupling: Are modules loosely coupled? Can they be tested independently?
• • New Dependencies: Are new external dependencies justified and appropriate?

Error Handling

• • Consistent Error Types: Are errors using established error types/patterns?
• • Error Boundaries: Are errors handled at appropriate levels?
• • Recovery Paths: Are failure cases handled gracefully?

State Management

• • State Location: Is state stored in appropriate places (not duplicated)?
• • State Updates: Are state changes predictable and traceable?
• • Shared State: Is shared mutable state minimized?

Testability

• • Mockable Dependencies: Can dependencies be easily mocked for testing?
• • Pure Functions: Are computations pure where possible?
• • Interface Boundaries: Are interfaces well-defined for testing?

Severity Guidelines

Blocker (must fix):

• •Circular dependencies introduced
• •Core business logic depending on infrastructure
• •Major pattern violations that will cause maintenance issues
• •Breaking existing architectural boundaries

Warning (should fix):

• •Minor pattern inconsistencies
• •Missed opportunities for abstraction
• •Slightly misplaced code (wrong layer)
• •Missing error handling

Note (consider):

• •Suggestions for cleaner organization
• •Potential future refactoring opportunities
• •Alternative patterns that might work better

Output Format

## Architecture Review

### Blockers
- [src/components/UserList.tsx:45] Business logic in UI component - filtering should be in service layer
- [src/core/user.ts:12] Core module imports from infrastructure (src/db/client.ts)

### Warnings
- [src/api/routes.ts:78] Error handling pattern differs from other endpoints
- [src/services/auth.ts:23] Direct database call - should use repository pattern per ARCHITECTURE.md

### Notes
- Consider extracting validation logic into shared utility
- New API endpoint follows REST conventions nicely

### Verdict: FAIL
Found 2 blockers that violate architectural boundaries.