bnayae Stack Options & Evaluation (Orchestrator)
Generate 2-5 coherent stack candidates, evaluate them across multiple dimensions (including local dev experience), and present a comparable decision matrix. Different stacks can be optimize for specific vendor like AWS, GCP, Vercel.
Prerequisites
Requires architecture brief from architecture-refinement skill. If not available, invoke that skill first.
Process Overview
This skill orchestrates the following standalone skills (each can also be invoked directly):
- candidate-generator - Generate 2-5 stack candidates based on requirements
- decision-matrix - Build weighted comparison matrix
- Cost evaluators - Estimate costs per provider:
- cost-aws - AWS infrastructure costs
- cost-gcp - GCP infrastructure costs
- cost-supabase - Supabase platform costs
- cost-firebase - Firebase platform costs
- cost-vercel - Vercel platform costs
- local-dev-evaluator - Assess local development experience
- offline-impact-evaluator - Validate stack against offline requirement
- aspire-evaluator - Check .NET Aspire fit (when applicable)
- custom-explorer - Evaluate user-proposed combinations
All sub-skills are in the stack-evaluation/ directory and can be triggered independently.
For example: "Estimate AWS costs for EKS + Aurora" triggers cost-aws directly.
Evaluation Factors
Each candidate stack must be evaluated across:
- Monthly cost (baseline + scale curve)
- Maintainability / ops overhead
- Elasticity
- Reliability & DR posture
- Observability
- Security posture
- Vendor lock-in
- Local Dev DX (mandatory):
- Time-to-first-run
- Local dependency orchestration complexity
- Prod parity (auth/data/async/config)
- Local debugging + dev-time observability
- Offline Capability (when required):
- Offline strategy (cache-only, IndexedDB/SQLite, event queue, CRDTs, background sync)
- Data-loss prevention guarantees (none, ephemeral, session-durable, strong)
- Consistency model (none, eventual, strong)
- Sync complexity (1-5)
Output Contract
stack_evaluation:
architecture_brief_id: "<reference>"
candidates:
- id: "<unique_id>"
name: "<name>"
summary: "<one-line>"
components:
frontend: { technology: "", hosting: "" }
backend: { technology: "", hosting: "" }
database: { technology: "", hosting: "" }
auth: { provider: "" }
async: { technology: "" }
storage: { technology: "" }
local_dev_story: "<how to run locally>"
offline_profile:
strategy: "<cache_only|indexeddb|sqlite|crdt|event_queue|none>"
data_loss_guarantee: "<none|ephemeral|session_durable|strong>"
consistency_model: "<none|eventual|strong>"
sync_complexity: <1-5>
cost_estimate:
baseline: "<$/month>"
at_scale: "<$/month>"
scores:
cost: <1-5>
ops_overhead: <1-5>
reliability: <1-5>
scalability: <1-5>
security: <1-5>
vendor_lock_in: <1-5>
local_dev_dx: <1-5>
offline_capability: <1-5>
decision_matrix:
criteria_weights:
cost: <1-5>
ops_overhead: <1-5>
reliability: <1-5>
scalability: <1-5>
security: <1-5>
vendor_lock_in: <1-5>
local_dev_dx: <1-5>
offline_capability: <1-5>
ranked_options:
- candidate_id: "<id>"
weighted_score: <score>
rank: 1
recommendation:
top_choice: "<candidate_id>"
rationale: "<why>"
tradeoffs: "<key tradeoffs>"
Presentation
Present as comparison table:
| Criterion | Weight | Candidate A | Candidate B | Candidate C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | 4 | 4 ($$) | 3 ($$$) | 5 ($) |
| Ops Overhead | 3 | 5 (minimal) | 3 (moderate) | 4 (low) |
| Local Dev DX | 4 | 4 (good) | 3 (fair) | 5 (excellent) |
| Offline Capability | 3 | 4 (session) | 2 (transient) | 5 (strong) |
| Weighted Total | - | X.X | X.X | X.X |
Next Step
After user reviews candidates, proceed to stack-selection skill to confirm the chosen stack.