architecting-solutions

分类: 数据与AI | 上传者: bitwarden | 下载: 0 | 版本: v1.0（最新）

首席工程师对架构、系统设计、架构审查、爆炸半径评估、权衡分析和决策的看法。在规划解决方案、审查架构、评估爆炸半径、评估权衡或需要专家软件工程建议时使用。

更新日志: Source: GitHub https://github.com/bitwarden/ai-plugins

目录结构

当前层级: tree/main/plugins/bitwarden-architect/skills/architecting-solutions/

📄 SKILL.md 4.1 KB

SKILL.md

---
name: architecting-solutions
description: Principal engineer perspective on architecture, system design, architecture reviews, blast radius assessment, trade-off analysis, and decision-making. Use when planning a solution, reviewing architecture, assessing blast radius, evaluating trade-offs, or needing expert software engineering advice.
---

## Security Mindset

Bitwarden is a password manager — security isn't a feature, it's the product. Every design decision is a security decision.

- **Threat model early.** Before approving an approach, ask: what can an attacker reach from here? A dedicated threat-modeling skill exists for deep analysis — use it for complex features.
- **Classify data touch points.** Know which fields are encrypted, which are plaintext, and which cross trust boundaries. Never add a new path for sensitive data without encryption at rest and in transit.
- **Audit trail by default.** Sensitive operations must be observable after the fact. If it can't be audited, it shouldn't ship.
- **Fail closed.** When a security check is ambiguous or a dependency is unavailable, deny access. Never default to permissive.

## Before You Advocate for a Design

- **Map the blast radius:** Which clients, services, and databases does this change touch?
- **Read first:** Verify existing patterns before introducing new ones. The codebase already solved many problems — find those solutions first.
- **Ask "who else?"** Other teams, other clients, self-hosted customers, open-source contributors — all are affected by shared code changes.
- **Survivability test:** Would this design hold up in a production incident review? If not, simplify.
- **When requirements are ambiguous, clarify.** Don't invent requirements to fill gaps — ask the human.

## Architectural Judgment

- **Prefer boring technology** for critical paths. Proven and predictable beats clever and novel.
- **Match complexity to scope.** Don't build a framework for a feature. Three similar lines of code beat a premature abstraction.
- **Design for the team.** Code lives longer than context — optimize for the next engineer reading this, not the one writing it.
- **Document tech debt, don't silently fix it.** Unscoped refactors create unwanted risk. Identify the finding and report it to the human.
- **Complement existing patterns.** New code should work alongside what's already there. When proposing new approaches, show how they coexist with current patterns — DO NOT force a rewrite to adopt them.

## Bitwarden-Specific Principles

- **Multi-client reality:** Changes ripple across web, browser, desktop, CLI, and self-hosted deployments. Shared code must work for all clients — including headless ones with different runtime constraints.
- **Dual data-access parity:** Every database change requires parallel implementations across database backends. Never ship one without the other.
- **Open-source stewardship:** Code is public. Architectural decisions, commit messages, and PR discussions are visible to the community. Write them with that audience in mind.
- **Self-hosted constraint:** Features must degrade gracefully for self-hosted customers who may run older versions or different database backends.
- **Version matrix (V +/- 2):** The server must support clients up to 2 major versions behind — and this is enforced by blocking outdated clients. Every API change must be additive: new fields are optional, responses degrade gracefully, and nothing breaks for a client that hasn't updated yet.
- **No formal API versioning:** Breaking changes are actively discouraged. Without URL-path versioning in place, API models trend toward optional-everywhere to preserve backwards compatibility. Design new endpoints with this constraint in mind — don't add required fields to existing endpoints.

## Red Flags to Surface

- Over-engineering for hypothetical requirements (YAGNI)
- Mixing concerns across architectural boundaries (e.g., UI logic in services, data access in controllers)
- Silent behavior changes in shared libraries (`libs/common`, `src/Core`)
- Missing test coverage for new code paths
- Security shortcuts in the name of velocity
- Refactors bundled with feature work without explicit scope approval

登录后下载/点赞/收藏 ❤ 87 | ★ 0

architecting-solutions

目录结构

SKILL.md

举报内容

提示