Atlas / Skills / tech-leads-club / Modular Design Principles

Modular Design PrinciplesSAFE

skills/tech-leads-club/modular-design-principles

The secure, validated skill registry for professional AI coding agents. Extend Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and more with absolute confidence.

Verdict
SAFE
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
—
Hosts
—
License
NOASSERTION
Stars
7,038
01

Overview

The secure, validated skill registry for professional AI coding agents. Extend Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and more with absolute confidence.

Read from source at commit 069343ba7895OBSERVED · 2026-10-07
02

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: modular-design-principles
description: >
  Technology-agnostic guidance for modular systems: bounded contexts, clear boundaries,
  composability, state isolation, explicit contracts, failure containment, scaffolding workflows,
  split/merge criteria, sub-units inside a context, and compliance review signals. Use when
  designing or reviewing module structure, service boundaries, package layout, cross-cutting
  dependencies, "how should we split this?", modularity assessments, coupling between domains,
  greenfield context design, or architecture discussions without assuming a specific framework,
  language, or repository layout. Do NOT use for executing the full Patterns 1–5 repo
  decomposition pipeline or per-pattern inventories (use modular-decomposition), phased
  extraction roadmaps as the main deliverable (use decomposition-planning-roadmap), or
  end-to-end legacy migration strategy (use legacy-migration-planner).
---

# Modular Design Principles

Use this skill when reasoning about **structure and boundaries** in any codebase. It intentionally avoids framework names, folder conventions, and tooling — map principles to your stack locally.

## What to load

| Task | Where |
|------|--------|
| Principles table + violations + workflows (this file) | `SKILL.md` |
| Per-principle definition, agent rules, abstract examples | `references/principles.md` |

---

## Layered mental model

- **Composition roots** (applications, hosts, runners): wire modules together; keep orchestration thin.
- **Modules / bounded contexts**: cohesive units of behavior and data ownership; each should be understandable and testable on its own.
- **Shared kernels** (use sparingly): only stable, truly cross-cutting concepts; resist turning them into a grab-bag of “everything everyone needs.”

How you physically lay this out (mono repo, multi repo, packages, libraries) is a **delivery choice**, not the definition of modularity. The principles below still apply.

---

## The ten principles

| # | Principle | Intent |
|---|-----------|--------|
| 1 | **Well-defined boundaries** | A small, stable **public surface**; everything else is internal. Consumers depend on contracts, not internals. |
| 2 | **Composability** | Modules can be used alone or combined without special knowledge of each other’s internals. |
| 3 | **Independence** | No hidden shared mutable state across boundaries; each module should be testable in isolation (with fakes or test doubles at the edges). |
| 4 | **Individual scale** | Resources (compute, storage, rate limits, batch size) can be tuned **per module** where it matters, without rewriting others. |
| 5 | **Explicit communication** | Cross-module interaction uses **documented contracts** (APIs, events, messages, shared types) — not incidental coupling. |
| 6 | **Replaceability** | Dependencies on other modules are expressed through **interfaces or protocols** so implementations can change. |
| 7 | **Deployment independence** | Modules do not assume they share a process, host, or release cadence unless that is an explicit architectural decision. |
| 8 | **State isolation** | Each module **owns** its persistent state and naming; no silent sharing of the same logical data store or ambiguous global names across boundaries. |
| 9 | **Observability** | Each module can be diagnosed on its own: logs, metrics, traces, health — attributable to the unit that emitted them. |
| 10 | **Fail independence** | Failures are **contained** (timeouts, bulkheads, circuit breaking, idempotency) so one module’s outage does not blindly cascade. |

**Principle 8** is often the hardest: ambiguous ownership of data or names is a frequent source of “works until it doesn’t” integration bugs.

For **depth** (rules for agents + abstract examples per principle), load `references/principles.md`.

---

## Typical violations (stated abstractly)

1. **Colliding concepts** — the same name or schema for different things in different modules, or duplicate “global” definitions that diverge over time.
2. **Reach-through persistence** — one module reading or writing another module’s tables, buckets, or documents **without** going through an agreed contract.
3. **Centralized data ownership** — a single persistence layer that registers and exposes **all** stores for **all** modules, encouraging hidden coupling.
4. **Logic at the edge** — business rules in transport adapters (HTTP handlers, UI, CLI) instead of domain/application code.
5. **Edge talking to storage directly** — adapters depending on low-level persistence APIs instead of use cases or application services.
6. **Unscoped transactions** — writes that span boundaries without clear transaction ownership and failure semantics.
7. **Leaky exports** — repositories, internal services, or implementation types exposed as the module’s public API.
8. **Facades that aren’t thin** — “public” entry points that embed querying, mapping, or policy instead of delegating to the right layer inside the module.

---

## Creating a bounded context (workflow)

Use when introducing a **new** cohesive area of the system (greenfield module or extracted domain).

1. **Scope and language** — Name the context; list core nouns/verbs (**ubiquitous language**). Reject vague names that collide with other contexts.
2. **Responsibilities** — What decisions happen **only** here? What is explicitly *out* of scope?
3. **State ownership** — Which facts are **authoritative** in this context? Where are they stored conceptually (even if storage tech is undecided)?
4. **Public contract** — Operations and/or events other contexts may use. Version or evolve this contract intentionally.
5. **Integrations** — For each neighbor: sync call, async message, shared read model, or batch sync? Document **consistency** (immediate, eventual) and **failure** behavior.
6. **Invariants and lifecycles** — What must always be true inside this boundary? What starts/completes a lifecycle?
7. **Isolation check** — Can you test co
03

Trust audit

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryPASS
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (1)

LOWInventory / provenance · inv.symlink · CWE-1104
CLAUDE.md
CLAUDE.md
Why it matters. link not followed

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-10-07 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha 069343ba7895full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/tech-leads-club__modular-design-principles.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
04

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-10-07069343ba7895SAFEB89first audit
05

Questions

What does the Modular Design Principles skill do?

The secure, validated skill registry for professional AI coding agents. Extend Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and more with absolute confidence.

Is Modular Design Principles safe to install?

The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.

What can Modular Design Principles access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (069343ba7895), read on 2026-10-07. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement