
Codebase Design
FreeStreamline module design with shared vocabulary.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Codebase Design does
The Codebase Design skill provides a structured approach to designing deep modules in software development. It emphasizes the importance of a shared vocabulary that helps developers articulate and improve module interfaces. By focusing on the concepts of depth, seams, and leverage, this skill assists users in identifying opportunities to enhance their code's structure, making it more testable and maintainable. This is particularly useful for teams looking to standardize their design language and improve collaboration on complex projects.
When using this skill, developers can expect to gain insights into how to create interfaces that are simple yet powerful. The skill encourages users to think critically about the relationship between a module's interface and its implementation, promoting a design philosophy that favors depth over superficial complexity. This results in cleaner, more efficient code that is easier to navigate and understand. The principles outlined in the skill also guide users in making informed decisions about where to place seams in their design, facilitating better modularization and separation of concerns.
Designed for developers and designers who are involved in creating or restructuring codebases, this skill is ideal for those who want to improve their coding practices and enhance the testability of their software. By adopting the terminology and principles provided, teams can create a consistent framework for discussing module design, leading to more effective collaboration and a shared understanding of best practices. Whether you're working on a new project or refactoring an existing codebase, Codebase Design can help streamline your workflow and improve the quality of your software.
When to use it
Use this skill when you need to design or refine module interfaces, assess deepening opportunities, or enhance code testability.
When not to use it
This skill may not be suitable for simple applications where module design complexity is minimal or for teams not interested in adopting a standardized vocabulary.
What you can build with it
Refactoring an Existing Module
When refactoring a complex module, use this skill to identify opportunities for simplifying the interface while retaining functionality.
Designing a New Feature
In the early stages of feature development, apply the principles of deep modules to ensure a clean and maintainable code structure.
Improving Team Collaboration
Use the shared vocabulary from this skill to align your team on module design practices, making discussions more efficient and productive.
How to install Codebase Design
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills/codebase-design --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by sickn33Codebase Design
When to Use
Use when this workflow matches the user request: Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.
Source: mattpocock/skills (MIT).
Design deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface. Use this language and these principles wherever code is being designed or restructured. The aim is leverage for callers, locality for maintainers, and testability for everyone.
Glossary
Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
Module — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. Avoid: unit, component, service.
Interface — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. Avoid: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).
Implementation — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from Adapter: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
Depth — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is deep when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, shallow when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
Seam (Michael Feathers) — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the location at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. Avoid: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
Adapter — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes role (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
Leverage — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
Locality — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
Deep vs shallow
Deep module = small interface + lots of implementation:
┌─────────────────────┐
│ Small Interface │ ← Few methods, simple params
├─────────────────────┤
│ │
│ Deep Implementation│ ← Complex logic hidden
│ │
└─────────────────────┘
Shallow module = large interface + little implementation (avoid):
┌─────────────────────────────────┐
│ Large Interface │ ← Many methods, complex params
├─────────────────────────────────┤
│ Thin Implementation │ ← Just passes through
└─────────────────────────────────┘
When designing an interface, ask:
- Can I reduce the number of methods?
- Can I simplify the parameters?
- Can I hide more complexity inside?
Principles
- Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation. A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have internal seams (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the external seam at its interface.
- The deletion test. Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
- The interface is the test surface. Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test past the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
- One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one. Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
Designing for testability
Good interfaces make testing natural:
-
Accept dependencies, don't create them.
// Testable function processOrder(order, paymentGateway) {} // Hard to test function processOrder(order) { const gateway = new StripeGateway(); } -
Return results, don't produce side effects.
// Testable function calculateDiscount(cart): Discount {} // Hard to test function applyDiscount(cart): void { cart.total -= discount; } -
Small surface area. Fewer methods = fewer tests needed. Fewer params = simpler test setup.
Relationships
- A Module has exactly one Interface (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
- Depth is a property of a Module, measured against its Interface.
- A Seam is where a Module's Interface lives.
- An Adapter sits at a Seam and satisfies the Interface.
- Depth produces Leverage for callers and Locality for maintainers.
Rejected framings
- Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
- "Interface" as the TypeScript
interfacekeyword or a class's public methods: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know. - "Boundary": overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say seam or interface.
Going deeper
- Deepening a cluster given its dependencies — see DEEPENING.md: dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
- Exploring alternative interfaces — see DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md: spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.
Limitations
- Requires the upstream tool, account, API key, or local setup when the workflow names one.
- Does not authorize destructive, production, paid, or external-message actions without explicit user approval.
- Validate generated artifacts or recommendations against the user's real sources before treating them as final.
Frequently asked questions about Codebase Design
Similar skills
React Composition Patterns
Streamline your React component architecture with proven patterns.
Pester Should Migration
Easily convert Pester v5 assertions to v6 syntax.
Radix to Base UI Migration
Seamlessly migrate React components from Radix UI to Base UI.
Migrate Next.js to Vinext
Seamlessly transition your Next.js projects to Vinext.
WinUI 3 Migration Guide
Streamline your UWP to WinUI 3 migration process.
Refactor
Enhance code maintainability without altering behavior.
