Candidate Generator

Stack Candidate Generator

Generate 2-5 coherent stack candidates based on project requirements.

Standalone Usage

Can be invoked directly:

• "Suggest stack options for a SaaS application"
• "What are good tech stacks for a real-time chat app?"
• "Generate architecture options for an e-commerce platform"

Common Stack Patterns

Serverless / Low-Ops

Container-Based / Balanced

Kubernetes / Full Control

Enterprise / .NET

Required Components

Each candidate must specify:

1. Frontend - Framework and hosting
2. Backend/API - Runtime and hosting
3. Database - Technology and managed/self-hosted
4. Authentication - Provider/solution
5. Hosting Model - Platform and strategy
6. Local Dev Story - How to run locally

Selection Criteria

When generating candidates, consider:

By Ops Maturity

• Low: Firebase, Supabase, Vercel, Amplify
• Medium: App Runner, Cloud Run, Container Apps
• High: ECS, GKE, EKS, self-managed

By Team Size

• Solo/Small (1-5): Serverless, BaaS platforms
• Medium (6-15): Containers, managed K8s
• Large (16+): K8s, multi-service architectures

By Offline Requirement

Output Contract

candidates:
  - id: "<unique_id>"
    name: "<descriptive name>"
    summary: "<one-line summary>"

    pattern_type: "<serverless|container|kubernetes|baas>"

    components:
      frontend:
        technology: "<framework>"
        hosting: "<platform>"
      backend:
        technology: "<runtime/framework>"
        hosting: "<platform>"
      database:
        technology: "<database>"
        hosting: "<managed|serverless|self-hosted>"
      auth:
        provider: "<solution>"
      async:
        technology: "<if needed>"
      storage:
        technology: "<if needed>"

    fits:
      budget: "<minimal|startup|growth|scale|enterprise>"
      ops_maturity: "<low|medium|high>"
      team_size: "<solo|small|medium|large>"

    local_dev_story: |
      <How a developer runs this end-to-end on a laptop>

    offline_story:
      level: "<none|transient|session_durable|strong_offline_first>"
      technologies: ["<offline tech stack>"]
      notes: "<implementation considerations>"

    strengths:
      - "<strength 1>"
      - "<strength 2>"

    tradeoffs:
      - "<tradeoff 1>"
      - "<tradeoff 2>"

Example Output

candidates:
  - id: "next-vercel-supabase"
    name: "Next.js + Vercel + Supabase"
    summary: "Modern full-stack with minimal ops"

    pattern_type: "serverless"

    components:
      frontend:
        technology: "Next.js 14 (App Router)"
        hosting: "Vercel Edge"
      backend:
        technology: "Next.js API Routes + Supabase Edge Functions"
        hosting: "Vercel + Supabase"
      database:
        technology: "PostgreSQL"
        hosting: "Supabase (managed)"
      auth:
        provider: "Supabase Auth"
      storage:
        technology: "Supabase Storage"

    fits:
      budget: "startup"
      ops_maturity: "low"
      team_size: "small"

    local_dev_story: |
      1. Clone repo
      2. cp .env.example .env.local
      3. supabase start (local Supabase)
      4. npm run dev
      Full stack running in < 5 minutes

    strengths:
      - "Zero DevOps needed"
      - "Excellent DX"
      - "Built-in auth, storage, realtime"

    tradeoffs:
      - "Vendor lock-in to Vercel/Supabase"
      - "Limited compute customization"