AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified Apache-2.0 Self-run

Agent Architecture Analysis

skill-existential-birds-beagle-agent-architecture-analysis · by existential-birds

Use when auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on \"analyze agent architecture\", \"12-factor audit\", \"how compliant is this agent\", or \"evaluate this LLM app\". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists \u2014 this perfo…

No reviews yet
0 installs
14 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-existential-birds-beagle-agent-architecture-analysis

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access Used
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-existential-birds-beagle-agent-architecture-analysis)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
1mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Agent Architecture Analysis? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

12-Factor Agents Compliance Analysis

> Reference: 12-Factor Agents

Input Parameters

| Parameter | Description | Required | |-----------|-------------|----------| | docs_path | Path to documentation directory (for existing analyses) | Optional | | codebase_path | Root path of the codebase to analyze | Required |

Analysis Framework

The full per-factor rubric — principle, search patterns, file patterns, compliance criteria (Strong/Partial/Weak), and anti-patterns for each of the 13 factors — lives in [references/factors.md](references/factors.md). During the [Analysis Workflow](#analysis-workflow), read the relevant factor sections there for the search patterns to run and the criteria to score against.

| # | Factor | Focus | |---|--------|-------| | 1 | Natural Language to Tool Calls | Schema-validated structured outputs from LLM | | 2 | Own Your Prompts | Prompts as first-class, versioned, templated code | | 3 | Own Your Context Window | Custom formatting of history/state/tool results | | 4 | Tools Are Structured Outputs | Validated JSON triggers deterministic code | | 5 | Unify Execution State | Single state object merging execution + business state | | 6 | Launch/Pause/Resume | APIs to launch, pause anywhere, resume | | 7 | Contact Humans with Tools | Human contact as a structured tool call | | 8 | Own Your Control Flow | Custom routing/retries, not framework defaults | | 9 | Compact Errors into Context | Errors fed back for self-healing + escalation | | 10 | Small, Focused Agents | Narrow responsibility, 3-10 steps each | | 11 | Trigger from Anywhere | CLI/REST/WebSocket/chat/webhook entry points | | 12 | Stateless Reducer | Pure (state, input) -> (state, output) agents | | 13 | Pre-fetch Context | Fetch likely-needed data upfront |

See [references/factors.md](references/factors.md) for the complete rubric for every factor above.


Output Format

Gate order: Do not assign Strong / Partial / Weak or treat recommendations as observed facts until Hard gates (after [Analysis Workflow](#analysis-workflow)) are satisfied for the factors in scope.

Executive Summary Table

| Factor | Status | Notes |
|--------|--------|-------|
| 1. Natural Language -> Tool Calls | **Strong/Partial/Weak** | [Key finding] |
| 2. Own Your Prompts | **Strong/Partial/Weak** | [Key finding] |
| ... | ... | ... |
| 13. Pre-fetch Context | **Strong/Partial/Weak** | [Key finding] |

**Overall**: X Strong, Y Partial, Z Weak

Per-Factor Analysis

For each factor, provide:

  1. Current Implementation
  • Evidence with file:line references
  • Code snippets showing patterns
  1. Compliance Level
  • Strong/Partial/Weak with justification
  1. Gaps
  • What's missing vs. 12-Factor ideal
  1. Recommendations
  • Actionable improvements with code examples

Analysis Workflow

  1. Initial Scan
  • Run search patterns for all factors
  • Identify key files for each factor
  • Note any existing compliance documentation
  1. Deep Dive (per factor)
  • Read identified files
  • Evaluate against compliance criteria
  • Document evidence with file paths
  1. Gap Analysis
  • Compare current vs. 12-Factor ideal
  • Identify anti-patterns present
  • Prioritize by impact
  1. Recommendations
  • Provide actionable improvements
  • Include before/after code examples
  • Reference roadmap if exists
  1. Summary
  • Compile executive summary table
  • Highlight strengths and critical gaps
  • Suggest priority order for improvements

Hard gates (evidence before scores)

Run these in order. Do not skip ahead: each Pass is an objective condition you can check (paths on disk, citations present), not internal certainty.

  1. Scan gate — After the initial scan (workflow step 1), Pass: for every factor (1–13) you have either (a) ≥1 repo-relative path or glob hit to inspect, or (b) a one-line note with rationale (e.g. search command/output, or “no matches — codebase may omit this concern”). Empty hand-waving (“looks fine”) fails this gate.
  2. Evidence gate (per factor) — Before writing Strong / Partial / Weak for that factor, Pass: “Current Implementation” includes ≥1 citation with file path plus line range or short quoted snippet from codebase_path, or an explicit no evidence located statement after targeted reads. If evidence is missing after search, default that factor to Weak unless the criterion is clearly N/A (say why).
  3. Synthesis gate — Executive summary table and per-factor analysis sections, Pass: only after gates 1–2 are satisfied for the factors in scope. Recommendations may name new files or patterns only as proposals; they must not be presented as observed facts without matching citations from step 2.

Quick Reference: Compliance Scoring

| Score | Meaning | Action | |-------|---------|--------| | Strong | Fully implements principle | Maintain, minor optimizations | | Partial | Some implementation, significant gaps | Planned improvements | | Weak | Minimal or no implementation | High priority for roadmap |

When to Use This Skill

  • Evaluating new LLM-powered systems
  • Reviewing agent architecture decisions
  • Auditing production agentic applications
  • Planning improvements to existing agents
  • Comparing frameworks or implementations

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.