--- name: arch-check description: Use to check a feature's code against the charter's architecture rules — dependency layering, cycles, forbidden patterns, file naming, file size. Triggers — "/engineer.arch-check", "architecture check", "check architecture fitness", "does this follow the charter", "check layering". --- # arch-check Run the charter architecture fitness check — Checkpoint 7 (Light Verify), alongside `crap-analyzer`. Turns the charter's architectural vision from prose into an objective gate: `dae_arch.py` reads the manifest's `architecture:` rules and reports violations. Read-only on the codebase — it reports, it does not fix. ## When to use Checkpoint 7, after the feature's code is implemented and refined. Also useful as a standalone audit (`--full`) of an existing project. **Not for:** change-risk analysis (`crap-analyzer`); artifact consistency (`consistency-check`); fixing violations (that is a human/agent decision per violation). ## Workflow ### Step 0 — Entry gate Verify the prior checkpoint is complete: run `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/dae_handoff.py --through 6`. On a non-zero exit, **stop** and surface the gap to the human. Verify branch hygiene: run `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/dae_branch.py `. On a non-zero exit, **stop** and surface the message to the human — switch branches and re-invoke. The check honors the `git.manual: true` manifest opt-out. After the gate passes, show the **pipeline breadcrumb**: run `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/dae_progress.py ` and present its output to the human — it shows where this checkpoint sits in the DAE pipeline. The breadcrumb is advisory: a non-zero exit or a missing `progress.md` never blocks the skill. Then create one TodoWrite todo per workflow step below. See `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/progress-indicator.md`. ### Step 1 — Run the check Run `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/dae_arch.py ` (add `--full` for a whole-project audit). If it reports "no `architecture:` section", tell the user the charter has no machine-readable architecture rules yet and stop. ### Step 1.5 — CRAP analysis CP7 Light Verify is arch-check **plus** `crap-analyzer`. If crap-analyzer hasn't run on the current diff, run it now over the feature's changed code. Keep its summary for the handoff: max CRAP, the offenders over `quality_thresholds.crap_max`, and the command. It is external and writes no handoff of its own, so this is where CP8's refinement-advisor reads it. ### Step 2 — Present violations Group the violations by kind (layering first — it is the architectural-vision core). For each, show `file:line` and the rule. Do not auto-fix. ### Step 3 — Triage with the human For each violation, the human decides: a real break (fix the code), or a rule that no longer fits (amend `manifest.architecture` — and the charter prose). `dae_arch.py` exiting non-zero means Checkpoint 7's architecture-fitness exit criterion is unmet until the violations are resolved. ### Step 3.5 — Runbook gate (if runbook.md exists) If `features//runbook.md` exists, check that every step blocking a deploy-related AC is `completed: true`. If any blocking step is open while its dependent AC is asserting `met: true`, surface it as a verification gap and refuse to mark CP7 complete. The runbook's `blocking_acs` list is the source of truth — see `engineer/skills/plan/references/runbook-template.md`. ### Step 4 — Handoff Emit a summary per `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/handoff-summary.md`. `checkpoint: 7`; the `exit_criteria` block asserts the architecture-fitness criterion with `verified_by: tool` and the `dae_arch.py` exit status as evidence, and carries crap-analyzer's summary as a `crap_results` block (`max_crap`, `offenders: [{symbol, file, crap, coverage}]`, `command`). CP8's harden and refinement-advisor read that block. `recommended_next`: "/engineer.harden (CP8)". ## References - [Foundation Design](https://www.notion.so/3585ecdee0e2811bbc67ff4913c03207) — the `architecture:` manifest section (§2); the Checkpoint Exit Contract (§8)