
Hexagonal Architecture
FreeDecouple your business logic from frameworks and infrastructure.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Hexagonal Architecture does
Hexagonal architecture, also known as the Ports and Adapters pattern, is a software design approach that emphasizes the separation of business logic from external dependencies such as frameworks, transport mechanisms, and data persistence. By defining clear boundaries between the core application and its external interactions, developers can create systems that are more maintainable and adaptable to change. This architecture is particularly beneficial when building applications that require long-term maintainability and testability, as it allows for easier refactoring and the ability to support multiple interfaces for the same functionality.
The core of hexagonal architecture is the concept of ports and adapters. The application defines abstract ports that represent the capabilities it offers (inbound ports) and the dependencies it requires (outbound ports). Adapters are then created to implement these ports, allowing for a clean separation between the application logic and the infrastructure. This means that when changes are needed—whether it's swapping out a database, modifying an API, or introducing a new user interface—the business rules remain untouched, leading to a more robust system.
This skill is designed for developers who want to implement hexagonal architecture in their projects. It provides a structured approach to defining use cases, modeling domain logic, and managing dependencies. By following the outlined steps, developers can ensure that their applications are designed with clear boundaries and that the core logic is insulated from external changes. This is particularly useful in scenarios where applications need to evolve over time or when integrating with various external systems.
In summary, hexagonal architecture offers a powerful way to design applications that are resilient to change, easy to test, and maintainable over time. By adopting this architectural style, developers can focus on delivering business value without being bogged down by the complexities of infrastructure and frameworks.
When to use it
Use this skill when developing new features that require a focus on long-term maintainability, or when refactoring existing code that mixes domain logic with I/O concerns.
When not to use it
This skill may not be suitable for simple applications where the overhead of implementing hexagonal architecture outweighs the benefits, or for projects with tight deadlines where rapid prototyping is prioritized over maintainability.
What you can build with it
Refactoring a Legacy Application
When faced with a legacy application that has tightly coupled components, this skill helps in restructuring the codebase to adopt hexagonal architecture, improving maintainability.
Building a New Feature
For new projects, use this skill to define clear boundaries and ensure that business logic is insulated from external dependencies from the start.
Integrating Multiple Interfaces
This skill is useful when you need to support various interfaces for the same functionality, such as HTTP, CLI, or background workers, allowing for a consistent core logic.
How to install Hexagonal Architecture
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add affaan-m/ecc/hexagonal-architecture --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 affaan-mHexagonal Architecture
Hexagonal architecture (Ports and Adapters) keeps business logic independent from frameworks, transport, and persistence details. The core app depends on abstract ports, and adapters implement those ports at the edges.
When to Use
- Building new features where long-term maintainability and testability matter.
- Refactoring layered or framework-heavy code where domain logic is mixed with I/O concerns.
- Supporting multiple interfaces for the same use case (HTTP, CLI, queue workers, cron jobs).
- Replacing infrastructure (database, external APIs, message bus) without rewriting business rules.
Use this skill when the request involves boundaries, domain-centric design, refactoring tightly coupled services, or decoupling application logic from specific libraries.
Core Concepts
- Domain model: Business rules and entities/value objects. No framework imports.
- Use cases (application layer): Orchestrate domain behavior and workflow steps.
- Inbound ports: Contracts describing what the application can do (commands/queries/use-case interfaces).
- Outbound ports: Contracts for dependencies the application needs (repositories, gateways, event publishers, clock, UUID, etc.).
- Adapters: Infrastructure and delivery implementations of ports (HTTP controllers, DB repositories, queue consumers, SDK wrappers).
- Composition root: Single wiring location where concrete adapters are bound to use cases.
Outbound port interfaces usually live in the application layer (or in domain only when the abstraction is truly domain-level), while infrastructure adapters implement them.
Dependency direction is always inward:
- Adapters -> application/domain
- Application -> port interfaces (inbound/outbound contracts)
- Domain -> domain-only abstractions (no framework or infrastructure dependencies)
- Domain -> nothing external
How It Works
Step 1: Model a use case boundary
Define a single use case with a clear input and output DTO. Keep transport details (Express req, GraphQL context, job payload wrappers) outside this boundary.
Step 2: Define outbound ports first
Identify every side effect as a port:
- persistence (
UserRepositoryPort) - external calls (
BillingGatewayPort) - cross-cutting (
LoggerPort,ClockPort)
Ports should model capabilities, not technologies.
Step 3: Implement the use case with pure orchestration
Use case class/function receives ports via constructor/arguments. It validates application-level invariants, coordinates domain rules, and returns plain data structures.
Step 4: Build adapters at the edge
- Inbound adapter converts protocol input to use-case input.
- Outbound adapter maps app contracts to concrete APIs/ORM/query builders.
- Mapping stays in adapters, not inside use cases.
Step 5: Wire everything in a composition root
Instantiate adapters, then inject them into use cases. Keep this wiring centralized to avoid hidden service-locator behavior.
Step 6: Test per boundary
- Unit test use cases with fake ports.
- Integration test adapters with real infra dependencies.
- E2E test user-facing flows through inbound adapters.
Architecture Diagram
flowchart LR
Client["Client (HTTP/CLI/Worker)"] --> InboundAdapter["Inbound Adapter"]
InboundAdapter -->|"calls"| UseCase["UseCase (Application Layer)"]
UseCase -->|"uses"| OutboundPort["OutboundPort (Interface)"]
OutboundAdapter["Outbound Adapter"] -->|"implements"| OutboundPort
OutboundAdapter --> ExternalSystem["DB/API/Queue"]
UseCase --> DomainModel["DomainModel"]
Suggested Module Layout
Use feature-first organization with explicit boundaries:
src/
features/
orders/
domain/
Order.ts
OrderPolicy.ts
application/
ports/
inbound/
CreateOrder.ts
outbound/
OrderRepositoryPort.ts
PaymentGatewayPort.ts
use-cases/
CreateOrderUseCase.ts
adapters/
inbound/
http/
createOrderRoute.ts
outbound/
postgres/
PostgresOrderRepository.ts
stripe/
StripePaymentGateway.ts
composition/
ordersContainer.ts
TypeScript Example
Port definitions
export interface OrderRepositoryPort {
save(order: Order): Promise<void>;
findById(orderId: string): Promise<Order | null>;
}
export interface PaymentGatewayPort {
authorize(input: { orderId: string; amountCents: number }): Promise<{ authorizationId: string }>;
}
Use case
type CreateOrderInput = {
orderId: string;
amountCents: number;
};
type CreateOrderOutput = {
orderId: string;
authorizationId: string;
};
export class CreateOrderUseCase {
constructor(
private readonly orderRepository: OrderRepositoryPort,
private readonly paymentGateway: PaymentGatewayPort
) {}
async execute(input: CreateOrderInput): Promise<CreateOrderOutput> {
const order = Order.create({ id: input.orderId, amountCents: input.amountCents });
const auth = await this.paymentGateway.authorize({
orderId: order.id,
amountCents: order.amountCents,
});
// markAuthorized returns a new Order instance; it does not mutate in place.
const authorizedOrder = order.markAuthorized(auth.authorizationId);
await this.orderRepository.save(authorizedOrder);
return {
orderId: order.id,
authorizationId: auth.authorizationId,
};
}
}
Outbound adapter
export class PostgresOrderRepository implements OrderRepositoryPort {
constructor(private readonly db: SqlClient) {}
async save(order: Order): Promise<void> {
await this.db.query(
"insert into orders (id, amount_cents, status, authorization_id) values ($1, $2, $3, $4)",
[order.id, order.amountCents, order.status, order.authorizationId]
);
}
async findById(orderId: string): Promise<Order | null> {
const row = await this.db.oneOrNone("select * from orders where id = $1", [orderId]);
return row ? Order.rehydrate(row) : null;
}
}
Composition root
export const buildCreateOrderUseCase = (deps: { db: SqlClient; stripe: StripeClient }) => {
const orderRepository = new PostgresOrderRepository(deps.db);
const paymentGateway = new StripePaymentGateway(deps.stripe);
return new CreateOrderUseCase(orderRepository, paymentGateway);
};
Multi-Language Mapping
Use the same boundary rules across ecosystems; only syntax and wiring style change.
- TypeScript/JavaScript
- Ports:
application/ports/*as interfaces/types. - Use cases: classes/functions with constructor/argument injection.
- Adapters:
adapters/inbound/*,adapters/outbound/*. - Composition: explicit factory/container module (no hidden globals).
- Ports:
- Java
- Packages:
domain,application.port.in,application.port.out,application.usecase,adapter.in,adapter.out. - Ports: interfaces in
application.port.*. - Use cases: plain classes (Spring
@Serviceis optional, not required). - Composition: Spring config or manual wiring class; keep wiring out of domain/use-case classes.
- Packages:
- Kotlin
- Modules/packages mirror the Java split (
domain,application.port,application.usecase,adapter). - Ports: Kotlin interfaces.
- Use cases: classes with constructor injection (Koin/Dagger/Spring/manual).
- Composition: module definitions or dedicated composition functions; avoid service locator patterns.
- Modules/packages mirror the Java split (
- Go
- Packages:
internal/<feature>/domain,application,ports,adapters/inbound,adapters/outbound. - Ports: small interfaces owned by the consuming application package.
- Use cases: structs with interface fields plus explicit
New...constructors. - Composition: wire in
cmd/<app>/main.go(or dedicated wiring package), keep constructors explicit.
- Packages:
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
- Domain entities importing ORM models, web framework types, or SDK clients.
- Use cases reading directly from
req,res, or queue metadata. - Returning database rows directly from use cases without domain/application mapping.
- Letting adapters call each other directly instead of flowing through use-case ports.
- Spreading dependency wiring across many files with hidden global singletons.
Migration Playbook
- Pick one vertical slice (single endpoint/job) with frequent change pain.
- Extract a use-case boundary with explicit input/output types.
- Introduce outbound ports around existing infrastructure calls.
- Move orchestration logic from controllers/services into the use case.
- Keep old adapters, but make them delegate to the new use case.
- Add tests around the new boundary (unit + adapter integration).
- Repeat slice-by-slice; avoid full rewrites.
Refactoring Existing Systems
- Strangler approach: keep current endpoints, route one use case at a time through new ports/adapters.
- No big-bang rewrites: migrate per feature slice and preserve behavior with characterization tests.
- Facade first: wrap legacy services behind outbound ports before replacing internals.
- Composition freeze: centralize wiring early so new dependencies do not leak into domain/use-case layers.
- Slice selection rule: prioritize high-churn, low-blast-radius flows first.
- Rollback path: keep a reversible toggle or route switch per migrated slice until production behavior is verified.
Testing Guidance (Same Hexagonal Boundaries)
- Domain tests: test entities/value objects as pure business rules (no mocks, no framework setup).
- Use-case unit tests: test orchestration with fakes/stubs for outbound ports; assert business outcomes and port interactions.
- Outbound adapter contract tests: define shared contract suites at port level and run them against each adapter implementation.
- Inbound adapter tests: verify protocol mapping (HTTP/CLI/queue payload to use-case input and output/error mapping back to protocol).
- Adapter integration tests: run against real infrastructure (DB/API/queue) for serialization, schema/query behavior, retries, and timeouts.
- End-to-end tests: cover critical user journeys through inbound adapter -> use case -> outbound adapter.
- Refactor safety: add characterization tests before extraction; keep them until new boundary behavior is stable and equivalent.
Best Practices Checklist
- Domain and use-case layers import only internal types and ports.
- Every external dependency is represented by an outbound port.
- Validation occurs at boundaries (inbound adapter + use-case invariants).
- Use immutable transformations (return new values/entities instead of mutating shared state).
- Errors are translated across boundaries (infra errors -> application/domain errors).
- Composition root is explicit and easy to audit.
- Use cases are testable with simple in-memory fakes for ports.
- Refactoring starts from one vertical slice with behavior-preserving tests.
- Language/framework specifics stay in adapters, never in domain rules.
Frequently asked questions about Hexagonal Architecture
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.
