archify-review
tt-a1i/archify
Review issues, PRs, and code through value, cost, and impact for evidence-based maintenance decisions.
What is archify-review?
Archify Review helps teams evaluate whether problems are worth addressing and whether proposed solutions are maintainable long-term. Use it for issue triage, pull request reviews, and code quality assessments by systematically analyzing value (real problem and who benefits), cost (implementation and maintenance effort), and impact (affected behavior and future constraints).
- Assess problem value: identify real issues, beneficiaries, frequency, and consequences
- Evaluate implementation cost: estimate effort, verification complexity, and long-term maintenance burden
- Analyze impact: identify affected modules, user consequences, and maintainability implications
- Ground decisions in evidence: verify facts, distinguish assumptions from direct verification
- Identify better alternatives and unresolved questions that affect the decision
- Scale review detail proportionally to the importance of each concern
How to install archify-review
npx skills add https://github.com/tt-a1i/archify --skill archify-reviewHow to use archify-review
- 1.Identify the problem or change under review
- 2.Analyze value: who benefits, how often does it occur, what are the consequences
- 3.Estimate cost: implementation effort, verification complexity, future maintenance burden
- 4.Assess impact: affected modules, user-facing changes, maintainability effects
- 5.Ground your judgment in evidence: verify facts and distinguish assumptions
- 6.Document whether the work is worthwhile, any better alternatives, and unresolved questions
Use cases
- Triage incoming issues to prioritize high-value, low-cost work
- Review pull requests to ensure proposed changes justify their maintenance cost
- Assess code quality concerns and refactoring proposals against their long-term impact
- Evaluate feature requests against implementation complexity and user benefit
- Make evidence-based decisions on whether to address technical debt
- Maintainers and code reviewers
- Technical leads making prioritization decisions
- Teams managing open-source or internal repositories
- Engineers evaluating refactoring or architectural changes
archify-review FAQ
Use it for issue triage, pull request reviews, and code quality assessments where you need to decide whether a problem is worth addressing and whether a proposed solution is maintainable.
Verify the target revision and relevant facts directly rather than relying on assumptions. Distinguish between what you've verified yourself and what is existing evidence or assumption.
Consult the repository's REVIEWING.md and CONTRIBUTING.md files for specific policies and contribution guidelines that may affect your review.
No. Balance cost against value and impact. A slightly higher-cost solution may be worthwhile if it significantly improves maintainability or reduces future constraints.
Scale the detail to the importance of each concern. Minor issues warrant brief analysis; significant architectural or maintenance decisions deserve thorough evidence-based evaluation.
Full instructions (SKILL.md)
Source of truth, from tt-a1i/archify.
name: archify-review description: Review Archify issues, PRs, or code through value, cost, and impact to support evidence-based maintenance decisions. Use for issue triage, change reviews, and code quality assessments.
Archify Review
Judge whether a problem is worth addressing and an approach is worth maintaining over time.
- Value: Identify the real problem, who benefits, how often it occurs, its consequences, and whether it is worth addressing now.
- Cost: Consider implementation and verification effort, along with the future cost of understanding, changing, and maintaining the code. Prefer existing capabilities and keep the solution proportional to the problem.
- Impact: Identify affected behavior and modules, consequences for users and future development, and whether the change improves maintainability or adds coupling and constraints.
Consider maintainability, complexity, compatibility, performance, and other relevant concerns within these three dimensions, according to the specific problem.
Ground judgments in evidence: verify the target revision and relevant facts, distinguish direct verification from existing evidence and assumptions, and choose checks that resolve the key uncertainties.
Explain whether the work is worthwhile, the approach's cost and impact, any better alternatives, and unresolved questions that matter to the decision. Give reasons and scale the detail to the importance of each concern.
For repository-specific review and contribution requirements, consult REVIEWING.md and CONTRIBUTING.md as needed.
Related skills
More from tt-a1i/archify and the wider catalog.
archify
Create interactive architecture, workflow, sequence, and data-flow diagrams with dark/light themes and export to HTML, PNG, SVG, or WebM.
turso-cloud
Fully managed SQLite-compatible database platform with vector search, branching, and multi-language SDKs.
async-io-model
Cooperative async patterns for Turso: IOResult state machines, re-entrancy safety, and CompletionGroup aggregation.
code-quality
Production-grade correctness rules for Rust: crash over corruption, assert invariants, avoid hacks.
debugging
Debug Turso database issues using bytecode comparison, logging, ThreadSanitizer, and deterministic simulation.
differential-fuzzer
Information about the differential fuzzer tool, how to run it and use it catch bugs in Turso. Always load this skill when running this tool