Install
$ agentstack add skill-int2t05-engineering-skills-schema-design ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo 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 No
- ✓ 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.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
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 →About
Schema Design
Design the data model that sits beneath the API and beside the domain language. architecture picks the datastore type; domain-modeling sharpens the vocabulary; this skill designs the actual shape of the data — entities, relationships, indexes, constraints, and how the model scales. A schema designed reactively (added-to-as-features-arrive) becomes a performance and correctness liability that is expensive to fix later.
When to use
- Designing entities and relationships for a new feature or bounded context
- Choosing normalization level, indexing strategy, or partitioning for a new model
- Reviewing a proposed schema for correctness, performance, or future evolution
- Triggers on "data model", "schema design", "database design", "ER model", "数据模型", "表结构设计", "数据库设计"
> Scope: assumes a relational datastore (Postgres/MySQL/SQLite). For document stores > (MongoDB), key-value (DynamoDB), or graph stores, the embedding-vs-referencing and > sharding decisions differ — use architecture for datastore selection, then adapt these > patterns.
Not for: choosing the datastore type (use architecture); ubiquitous-language glossary (use domain-modeling); API request/response shapes (use api-design); changing an existing schema in production (use deprecation-migration).
Steps
1. Map entities and relationships
Start from the domain model (domain-modeling output / CONTEXT.md) and translate nouns into entities, verbs into relationships. For each entity, identify its identity (primary key), its attributes, and its lifecycle (created, mutated, archived, deleted).
- Draw an ER diagram (Mermaid erDiagram — see
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/mermaid-diagrams.md) - Cardinality for every relationship: one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-many
- Resolve many-to-many with junction tables; never hide them in a comma-separated column
Verify: every entity in the domain model is represented; every relationship has documented cardinality.
2. Choose normalization level
Normalize by default (3NF / BCNF) — it eliminates anomalies and keeps the model honest. Denormalize deliberately, only when a measured read pattern justifies the write complexity and consistency risk. Document every denormalization as a trade-off: what read it optimizes, what write it complicates, how consistency is maintained.
- Foreign keys for every relationship (enforce referential integrity at the DB level)
- Surrogate keys (UUID/serial) over natural keys unless the natural key is truly immutable
- NULL semantics: every nullable column has a documented meaning — "unknown" vs. "none" vs. "not yet"
Verify: every FK is enforced; every denormalization is documented with its trade-off.
3. Design indexes
Index for the queries, not the columns. Start from the access patterns (how will this data be read?), then create indexes that serve them. Every index has a cost — write amplification and storage — so justify each one against a concrete query.
- Composite indexes ordered by selectivity and equality-before-range
- Covering indexes for hot read paths (include columns to avoid table lookups)
- Partial / filtered indexes for common WHERE predicates (e.g.
WHERE deleted_at IS NULL) - Unique indexes to enforce business invariants (one active subscription per user)
Verify: every index maps to a named query; EXPLAIN on each access pattern uses an index, not a seq scan.
4. Define constraints and invariants
The database is the last line of defense for data integrity. Push invariants into constraints — they are enforced regardless of application bugs:
NOT NULLunless the column genuinely can be absentCHECKconstraints for range/format invariants (price ≥ 0, status in allowed set)UNIQUEconstraints for business keys (email, slug, active-session-per-user)- Foreign key actions:
ON DELETE/ON UPDATE(RESTRICT / CASCADE / SET NULL) chosen deliberately
Verify: every business invariant is backed by a constraint, not just application logic.
5. Plan for scale and evolution
Design the model to survive growth without a painful migration:
- Partitioning strategy for large tables (range by date, hash by tenant) — decide before the table
hits 100M rows, not after
- Avoid hot writes to a single sequence (use scattered keys or per-tenant sequences at scale)
- Soft delete (
deleted_attimestamp) for audit-relevant data; hard delete for ephemeral data —
choose per entity, document why
- Forward-compatible types:
timestamptz(nottimestamp),UUIDorbigint(notintfor IDs
that may exceed 2B)
Verify: partitioning decision is documented; ID types won't overflow; soft/hard-delete policy is stated per entity.
6. Document
Output: docs/design/SCHEMA.md — the data model document: ER diagram, entity definitions with columns/types/constraints, index plan mapped to access patterns, partitioning strategy, and any denormalization trade-offs. Reference ADRs for significant model decisions.
Verify
- [ ] ER diagram drawn (Mermaid); every entity and relationship documented
- [ ] Normalization level stated; every denormalization documented with trade-off
- [ ] Foreign keys enforced at DB level; referential integrity does not rely on application code
- [ ] Indexes mapped to named queries;
EXPLAINconfirms index usage on access patterns - [ ] Business invariants backed by CHECK / UNIQUE constraints
- [ ] ID types won't overflow; partitioning strategy stated for growth tables
- [ ]
docs/design/SCHEMA.mdproduced with ER diagram + entity/index/constraint plan
Red flags: comma-separated lists in a column; missing foreign keys; indexing every column (or no indexes); SELECT * driving the schema; int IDs on tables that will grow; NULL with no documented meaning; relying solely on application code for integrity; no partitioning plan for a table that will exceed memory.
References
- [${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/engineering-principles.md](${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/engineering-principles.md) — shared discipline (surface assumptions, enforce simplicity, verify don't assume)
- [${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/mermaid-diagrams.md](${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/mermaid-diagrams.md) — Mermaid erDiagram syntax for entity-relationship diagrams
- [references/schema-patterns.md](references/schema-patterns.md) — normalization trade-offs, index patterns, partitioning strategies, soft-delete policies
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: int2t05
- Source: int2t05/engineering-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.