How do I install the Arc Design Review skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add onfire7777/arc-design-review in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Arc Design Review safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Arc Design Review?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Arc Design Review free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Arc Design Review?

onfire7777 (@onfire7777) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Arc Design Review by onfire7777 — Agent Skill

Name: Arc Design Review
Author: onfire7777

Arc Design Review

Three-phase architecture design review pipeline: Architect creates initial design, Refiner improves it, Critic challenges it. Then facilitated discussion produces an Architecture Decision Record. Use for system design, major refactors, new features, or any significant architectural decision. Triggers on: 'architecture review', 'design review', 'ADR', 'architecture decision', 'system design review', 'review this architecture', 'should we build it this way'.

onfire7777 Updated Sep 17, 2026

File contents

Architect-Refine-Critique Design Review

Overview

A three-phase design review pipeline that produces an Architecture Decision Record.

Phase 1: Architect

Research the codebase and project conventions
Identify constraints, requirements, integration points
Create initial design with component diagrams
Document structural decisions with reasoning

Phase 2: Refine

Review the initial design for gaps
Improve based on best practices and current trends
Challenge assumptions, verify feasibility
Produce refined design document

Phase 3: Critique

Adversarial evaluation of the refined design
Rate findings by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
Identify risks, failure modes, scaling concerns
Propose alternatives where design is weak

Phase 4: Review & ADR

Facilitated discussion with the user:

Present initial design summary — discuss strengths/weaknesses
Present refinements — discuss whether they addressed right issues
Present critique findings one by one — user decides Accept/Reject/Defer
Synthesize into ADR:

# ADR: [Title]
**Status:** Proposed | **Date:** [today]
## Context: [problem + constraints]
## Decision: [chosen architecture + reasoning]
## Consequences: [positive, negative, mitigations]
## Alternatives Considered: [rejected options + why]
## Process Improvements: [patterns identified during review]

Rules

🚨 Ground every decision in a named principle (SRP, DIP, separation-of-concerns, etc.) 🚨 Discuss ALL phases in order — don't skip. 🚨 Don't decide for the user. Present, discuss, let them choose.

---name: arc-design-reviewdescription: Three-phase architecture design review pipeline: Architect creates initial design, Refiner improves it, Critic challenges it. Then facilitated discussion produces an Architecture Decision Record. Use for system design, major refactors, new features, or any significant architectural decision. Triggers on: 'architecture review', 'design review', 'ADR', 'architecture decision', 'system design review', 'review this architecture', 'should we build it this way'.---# Architect-Refine-Critique Design Review## OverviewA three-phase design review pipeline that produces an Architecture Decision Record.## Phase 1: Architect- Research the codebase and project conventions- Identify constraints, requirements, integration points- Create initial design with component diagrams- Document structural decisions with reasoning## Phase 2: Refine- Review the initial design for gaps- Improve based on best practices and current trends- Challenge assumptions, verify feasibility- Produce refined design document## Phase 3: Critique- Adversarial evaluation of the refined design- Rate findings by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)- Identify risks, failure modes, scaling concerns- Propose alternatives where design is weak## Phase 4: Review & ADRFacilitated discussion with the user:1. Present initial design summary — discuss strengths/weaknesses2. Present refinements — discuss whether they addressed right issues3. Present critique findings one by one — user decides Accept/Reject/Defer4. Synthesize into ADR:```markdown# ADR: [Title]**Status:** Proposed | **Date:** [today]## Context: [problem + constraints]## Decision: [chosen architecture + reasoning]## Consequences: [positive, negative, mitigations]## Alternatives Considered: [rejected options + why]## Process Improvements: [patterns identified during review]```## Rules🚨 Ground every decision in a named principle (SRP, DIP, separation-of-concerns, etc.)🚨 Discuss ALL phases in order — don't skip.🚨 Don't decide for the user. Present, discuss, let them choose.

Frequently asked questions