Install
$ agentstack add skill-patonkikh-apes-ai-solution-architect ✓ 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
AI Solution Architect
Purpose
Design an AI system architecture: model selection, inference pipeline, context management, evaluation strategy, and cost/latency trade-offs.
Input: Use case description, PRD/NFRs, data sources, constraints (budget, latency, privacy) Output: AI Architecture document with component diagram, model strategy, and quality gates Examples: See [examples.md](examples.md) for worked input/output.
Workflow
Step 1: Classify the AI use case
Categorize:
| Dimension | Classification | |-----------|----------------| | Interaction | Batch / real-time / streaming | | Task type | Generation / classification / retrieval / agentic | | User-facing | Yes / internal tool | | Risk level | Low / medium / high (customer-facing, regulated) |
Step 2: Define quality requirements
| Metric | Target | Measurement | |--------|--------|-------------|
Include: accuracy, latency (p50/p95), cost per request, hallucination tolerance, human-in-the-loop needs.
Step 3: Design inference pipeline
Document stages:
Input → Preprocessing → Context assembly → Model inference → Post-processing → Output
For each stage: technology, responsibility, failure mode.
Step 4: Select model strategy
Compare options:
| Option | Model type | Pros | Cons | Cost estimate | |--------|------------|------|------|---------------|
Options: frontier API, fine-tuned, open-weight self-hosted, ensemble, router.
Recommend with rationale tied to quality requirements.
Step 5: Plan context and memory
- Context window budget allocation
- RAG vs fine-tuning vs prompt-only decision
- Session memory strategy
- Tool/MCP integration points
Step 6: Define evaluation and guardrails
- Offline eval dataset requirements
- Online monitoring metrics
- Guardrails (input/output filters, HITL triggers)
- Rollback criteria
Step 7: Validate
Run Validation checklist.
Decision Rules
| Condition | Action | |-----------|--------| | Use case undefined | Stop; request problem statement or PRD | | High-risk customer-facing without HITL | Require human-in-the-loop in architecture | | Latency < 1s with RAG + large context | Flag latency risk; recommend caching or smaller model | | PII in prompts | Require data minimization and redaction layer | | No eval strategy | Block proceed; eval is mandatory for production |
Validation
- [ ] Use case classified with risk level
- [ ] Quality metrics with targets defined
- [ ] Inference pipeline documented end-to-end
- [ ] ≥2 model options compared with trade-offs
- [ ] Context/memory strategy defined
- [ ] Eval plan with offline and online components
- [ ] Guardrails specified for risk level
- [ ] Cost estimate order-of-magnitude provided
Anti-patterns
- Model-first design — choosing GPT-4 before defining requirements.
- No eval — shipping without measurement strategy.
- RAG as default — applying RAG without retrieval need analysis.
- Ignoring cost — architecture without cost per request estimate.
- Unbounded context — stuffing full documents without budget.
Best Practices
- Start with simplest architecture that meets quality bar.
- Separate retrieval, reasoning, and generation stages.
- Plan for model fallback and degradation.
- Align with architecture/scalability-advisor for infra scaling.
- Document AI-specific ADRs for model and RAG decisions.
Output Structure
# AI Architecture: [System Name]
## Use Case Classification
| Dimension | Value |
|-----------|-------|
## Quality Requirements
| Metric | Target | Method |
|--------|--------|--------|
## Inference Pipeline
[Stage diagram and descriptions]
## Model Strategy
| Recommended | Rationale | Alternatives |
|-------------|-----------|--------------|
## Context & Memory
[Strategy]
## Evaluation Plan
| Type | Dataset | Metrics | Frequency |
|------|---------|---------|-----------|
## Guardrails
| Layer | Control | Trigger |
|-------|---------|---------|
## Cost Estimate
[Per-request and monthly at projected volume]
## Open Decisions
- [ ] [ADR needed]
Next Skills
| Outcome | Recommended Skill | |---------|-------------------| | Design prompts | ai/prompt-engineer | | Plan context strategy | ai/context-engineering | | RAG architecture needed | rag/rag-architecture-designer | | Review prompts | ai/prompt-reviewer | | System architecture | architecture/solution-architecture |
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: patonkikh
- Source: patonkikh/APES
- 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.