Act Arch Solution Create

Arch skills operate 1–2 layers above dev:

• Dev: Code-level — e.g. "implement a feature and add a new table in the existing db".
• Arch: Composition-level — e.g. "there is a task that will require new kind of data and new processes independent of existing ones"; "sales need a platform to aggregate intel on leads".

This skill is arch-level: it shapes what gets built and how solutions relate, not the implementation.

Workflow

Format: All skills MUST use ### Phase N: Title for each workflow step. Enforced by validation script in CI.

Skill-eval (meta-evaluation): From the project root, run ./scripts/skill-eval.sh start {conversation_id} act-arch-solution-create at workflow start (conversation_id is injected at session start—look for "Conversation ID (for skill-eval)" in context). Capture the printed skill_id from the terminal output. Preserve both conversation_id and skill_id for the duration—if context gets summarized, ensure these IDs are retained. After each phase (or when skipping a phase), run ./scripts/skill-eval.sh complete {skill_id} {phase_no} or ./scripts/skill-eval.sh complete {skill_id} {phase_no} --skipped from the project root.

Create todo tasks for each phase before proceeding.

Phase 1: Handoff and scope narrowing

1. Take over from expert. Summarize the problem and list all proposed solutions (from transcript, issue, or prior message).
2. Check for existing solutions — Before narrowing, search for libraries, tools, prior art, or internal design docs that could replace or simplify any proposed solution. Web search, npm/GitHub, existing specs/. Share findings with user; prefer reuse over greenfield.
3. Present to user. "Here are the solutions from the expert reply (and any existing solutions found). Which make sense for us?"
4. Discuss with user. Iterate: Which solutions align with our goals? Which are out of scope, redundant, or infeasible?
5. Narrow the set. Agree on which solutions to pursue (one or more). Document the rationale briefly.

Output: Short list of solutions to pursue, with reasons.

Phase 2: Deep dive (iterative)

1. For each solution the user wants to explore first, produce a research / discovery / design document:
   • Goal and scope of this solution
   • Data, processes, and dependencies
   • How it fits with the rest of the system
   • Risks, trade-offs, alternatives considered
   • Suggested placement: {project}/specs/{topic}/ — create one directory per topic; README.md is the main design doc; put supporting docs (e.g. issues.md, per-solution files) in the same directory. Use the project the task relates to (e.g. agents → agents/specs/, crawlee-one → crawlee-one/specs/).
2. Iterate with user on each doc until satisfied.
3. For any selected solution not yet deep-dived, produce the same kind of doc.
4. Confirm with user when all selected solutions have design docs.

Output: One design doc per selected solution, user-approved.

Phase 3: Final review and confirm before creating work packages

1. Present all design docs to the user one last time.
2. STOP and wait. Do NOT proceed to Phase 4 (prioritization) or Phase 5 (create issues) until the user explicitly confirms. Give the user time to read through the docs.
3. Incorporate feedback — if the user requests changes, update the design docs and return to step 2.
4. Proceed only after explicit confirmation — e.g. "looks good", "go ahead", "create the issues". Do not assume readiness; wait for the user to say they're ready.

Output: Final set of design docs, user-approved. Do not create issues until user confirms.

Phase 4: Prioritization

1. Architect proposes either:
   • (a) A prioritization of solutions (order, dependencies, quick wins vs. long-term), or
   • (b) A test harness / evaluation approach to figure out prioritization (e.g. benchmark, A/B, pilot).
   • Note: The test harness may be one of the selected solutions (e.g. "synthetic regression tests" as meta-evaluation approach).
2. Iterate with user until agreement and shared understanding.
3. Document the agreed prioritization or harness in a short summary.

Output: Prioritization plan or test-harness plan, user-approved.

Phase 5: Create work packages

1. Create GitHub issues for each work package via act-repo-issue-create:
   • Include the full deep-dive design in the issue body (or link to {project}/specs/{topic}/ if already committed).
   • Add acceptance criteria, dependencies, and scope estimate (small/medium/large).
2. Create an umbrella issue that:
   • Links all subtask issues
   • Contains a summary of the overall discussion (problem, solutions considered, what was selected, rationale, prioritization)
   • Serves as the single place to track the initiative
3. Architect ensures in the breakdown:
   • Low tech debt — no shortcuts that will haunt us later
   • High separation of concerns — clear boundaries between pieces
   • Safety — guardrails, validation, rollback paths where relevant

Output: One umbrella issue + N work-package issues, all linked.

Phase 6: Hand off to PM

1. Summarize what was created (umbrella issue #, work-package issues).
2. Suggest "Run 'triage' or 'what's next?' to prioritize execution with the PM. Workers can take from this pool for parallel execution."
3. Flag parallelizable work where possible. Point to role-worker for pool-based implementation.

Design doc template (per solution)

Use for each deep-dive at {project}/specs/{topic}/README.md (main design doc; other supporting files like issues.md in the same {topic}/ directory):

# {Solution name} — Design

## Goal

{What this solution achieves and why it matters.}

## Scope

- In scope: ...
- Out of scope: ...

## Data / processes / dependencies

- {What data, where it comes from, what processes touch it}
- {Dependencies on other solutions or systems}

## How it fits

{Relation to other selected solutions; integration points.}

## Risks and trade-offs

- {Risk} — {mitigation}
- {Trade-off} — {why we accept it}

## Alternatives considered

- {Alt} — {why not chosen}

Verification

• All proposed solutions reviewed with user; narrowed set agreed
• Deep-dive design doc produced for each selected solution
• Final review completed; user approved docs
• Prioritization or test harness agreed with user
• Umbrella issue created with full discussion summary
• Work-package issues created with design docs in descriptions
• Tech debt, separation of concerns, and safety considered in breakdown

Out of scope

• Implementing the solutions — hand off to act-dev or worker agents
• Ongoing prioritization — PM owns that after handoff
• Single-solution, well-scoped goals — use role-architect instead (direct breakdown)

Related skills

• role-architect — For goals where the user already knows the direction; direct breakdown into issues.
• act-repo-issue-create — Used to create issues; retry on TLS errors if needed.
• role-pm — Handoff for prioritization and "what's next?" after issues are created.