Architecture Review Checklist

1. TASK Compliance

• Coverage: All Use Cases mapped to components?
• Constraints: All non-functional requirements met?

2. Data Model (CRITICAL)

• Completeness: All entities, attributes, relationships defined?
• Types: Correct data types chosen? (e.g., TIMESTAMP vs VARCHAR)
• Indexes: Defined for frequent queries?
• Migrations: Plan for existing data exists?
• Business Rules: Constraints enforced (UNIQUE, NOT NULL)?

3. System Design

• Simplicity: Least moving parts? (No overengineering).
• Style: Pattern matches problem (Monolith vs Microservices).
• Boundaries: Clear segregation of duties (SRP).
• Document Size: docs/ARCHITECTURE.md is ≤1500 lines, OR is an INDEX (~≤200 lines) with section chunks in docs/architectures/ and all links resolving.
• No Per-Task Drift: ARCHITECTURE.md is a single living document — no architecture-NNN-*.md snapshots, nothing moved into docs/archives/.

4. Security

• Auth: Authentication & Authorization defined?
• Protection: OWASP Top 10 considered?
• Secrets: No hardcoded keys?

5. Scalability & Reliability

• Scaling: Horizontal/Vertical strategy?
• Faults: Error handling, retries, backups?

6. Register (documentation-standards §5.5)

• Scan attached: artifact-formalizer/scripts/scan_register.py docs/ARCHITECTURE.md --sections was run; DETECTORS shows none dead. In Index Mode append the chunk paths (see the Script Contract).
• Warns resolved: zero warn, or each survivor carries a written reason.
• Terms declared, not assumed: every noun this document introduces as a term is defined here. ARCHITECTURE.md is what --terms reads downstream, so a metaphor introduced here legitimises itself in every task file that follows.

7. References (documentation-standards §4.1)

• Resolver run: python3 .agent/skills/documentation-standards/scripts/check_positional_refs.py --all docs/ARCHITECTURE.md docs/architectures/ was run, and its path:line coverage line is quoted in the review — not asserted to have been produced. A checklist cannot prove a command ran; pasted output can.
• Verdicts resolved: zero REFERENT_ABSENT and REFERENT_AMBIGUOUS, or each survivor carries a written reason. REFERENT_MOVED is repaired by re-running with --fix, never argued about — the number is derived from the referent, so no judgement is involved.
• A coordinate carrying no referent is not a defect. It is reported as not examined and is NOT required to gain one. This review never demands a migration: most corpora carry no referents at all, and adoption is the project's decision, not the reviewer's.
• Cross-repository coordinates pinned: a path outside this repository resolves to nothing and reports UNRESOLVABLE. It carries @<rev> naming the revision measured, which is the form §4.1 already licenses for a claim about another state.

Execution Mode

• Mode: hybrid
• Rationale: the checklist items are reviewer judgement; the register scan named in the Script Contract is deterministic and is run, not recalled.

Script Contract

• Primary Command: python3 .agent/skills/artifact-formalizer/scripts/scan_register.py docs/ARCHITECTURE.md --sections
• Index Mode only: when docs/architectures/ exists (ARCHITECTURE.md was split past 1500 lines), append the chunks: ... docs/ARCHITECTURE.md docs/architectures/*.md --sections. Check the directory first — ls -d docs/architectures. Do not pass the glob when the directory is absent, which is the default single-file state: bash forwards the unmatched pattern as a literal path (exit 3, no findings) and zsh aborts the command before the scanner runs.
• Outputs: findings, a DETECTORS probe table, a DIAGNOSTICS block, and the per-section worklist. --json for the same content as a document.
• Failure Semantics: 0 on any number of findings (advisory); 2 on a broken rule file or a dead detector; 3 on unreadable or absent input. A 2 or 3 invalidates the run, not the artifact.

Safety Boundaries

• Scope: read-only. A review reads artifacts and runs the read-only register scan; it never edits the artifact under review. Findings go to the review notes, and the authoring role applies them.

Validation Evidence

• Primary Evidence: the register scan named in the Register section, attached to the review notes with its DETECTORS and DIAGNOSTICS blocks intact.
• Quality Gate: no dead detector; zero unresolved warn; every checklist item above ticked against the artifact under review rather than against the previous revision.

Criticality Protocol

Severity is a named value, never a glyph (§5.5 rule 5).

• BLOCKING: Data Model error, Security hole, Unmet TASK requirement, dead detector in the register scan.
• MAJOR: Missing index, Questionable tech choice, Vague interface, Single-file ARCHITECTURE.md over 1500 lines (needs Index-Mode split), unresolved register warn.
• MINOR: Description clarity, typos.