aesthetic-instrument
great_cto's own committed aesthetic — the instrument panel. Dark five-step surface ladder, exactly one accent, two faces divided by MEANING (Geist speaks,…
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that great_cto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
$ npx -y skills add avelikiy/great_cto --skill anti-patterns --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/anti-patternsContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that great_cto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
name: anti-patterns description: Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that great_cto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident). when_to_use: | Apply when: - architect is writing ARCH/ADR and might be tempted by a known bad pattern - pm is decomposing tasks and the breakdown smells like a known failure mode - senior-dev is implementing and considers a "quick fix" that is anti-pattern - l3-support is doing root-cause and finds an anti-pattern as the cause - any agent reviewing third-party code that exhibits anti-patterns effort: low allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob paths: - "docs/**" - "src/**" - "lib/**"
Reference catalogue. Cite the anti-pattern by name when blocking a proposal — gives the user a clear vocabulary to discuss the issue.
**Smell:** One service does auth, billing, search, file storage, and email. **Why bad:** Single deploy unit, single point of failure, every team touches it, change velocity drops over time. **Fix:** Split by business capability (DDD bounded context).
**Smell:** 12 microservices but they share a database and deploy together. **Why bad:** All cost of distributed (latency, eventual consistency, ops overhead) with none of the benefits (independent deploy, isolation). **Fix:** Either truly separate (own DB, own deploy pipeline) or merge.
**Smell:** Request → Service A → Service B → Service C → Service D. **Why bad:** Compound failure probability, p99 latency adds up. **Fix:** Async with events, or co-locate hot path.
**Smell:** Custom Redis Lua scripts, hand-tuned binary protocols, before the first paying user. **Why bad:** Complexity cost paid up front, never recouped. **Fix:** Start simple. Optimize when you have load data.
**Smell:** "Let's use Kubernetes / GraphQL / event sourcing / DDD" with no current pain it solves. **Why bad:** Optimizes for engineer's resume, not user's outcome. **Fix:** Ask "what's the simplest thing that could work?"
**Smell:** "Let's rewrite this in <new framework>." **Why bad:** 80% of rewrites fail. The old system has years of bug fixes baked in. **Fix:** Strangler-fig. New behaviour in new code, old code coexists, delete when traffic moves.
**Smell:** "Senior X always fixes the 3am incidents." **Why bad:** Bus factor 1. X burns out. Knowledge doesn't transfer. **Fix:** Runbooks, post-mortems, rotating on-call, pair-debugging.
**Smell:** Plan ships a one-way door (data migration, public API change, breaking-contract release). **Why bad:** If wrong, recovery is days or weeks. **Fix:** Mandate dry-run + rollback path before approval.
**Smell:** Tasks named "implement feature X" with no end criteria. **Why bad:** Open scope, time inflates to fit. **Fix:** Each task ≤ 4 hours, with explicit "done = X" criteria.
**Smell:** A class > 500 lines or function > 100 lines doing 5 unrelated things. **Why bad:** Tests become integration tests. Diff readability collapses. **Fix:** Single responsibility. Extract collaborators.
**Smell:** Status passed as strings ("open", "closed", "blocked") with no enum. **Why bad:** Typos compile. New status forgotten in switch. **Fix:** Enum / discriminated union / branded type.
**Smell:**
try { doThing(); } catch (e) { console.log(e); }**Why bad:** Hides bugs. Silent corruption. **Fix:** Catch only what you can handle; re-throw the rest; log with context.
**Smell:** API keys, passwords, DB URLs in source. **Why bad:** Leaks in git history forever; rotation requires force-push (impossible). **Fix:** Env vars or secret manager. Pre-commit hook to grep for `sk-`, `ghp_`, etc.
**Smell:** "Production seems slow today" but no SLO target. **Why bad:** Can't tell breach from normal. **Fix:** Set p99 latency, error rate, availability SLOs. Track burn.
**Smell:** Every error pages. Engineers stop reading alerts. **Why bad:** Real incidents get missed in noise. **Fix:** Page only on user-visible failure. Other signals to dashboard, not pager.
**Smell:** "Engineer X deployed without testing." **Why bad:** Suppresses future post-mortems. Blame doesn't fix the system. **Fix:** Blameless post-mortems. Focus on missing guardrails, not the human.
**Smell:** "Don't reboot SRV-PROD-3, it has special config that's not in IaC." **Why bad:** Disaster recovery impossible. **Fix:** Everything in IaC. Servers are cattle, not pets.
When you find one of these in a proposal/review:
1. Cite the code (A-3, P-1, etc.) so the user has a vocabulary 2. Quote the specific smell from the proposal 3. Propose the specific fix 4. If the user disagrees, capture as ADR with the alternatives section filled in
You already have the agent. This is everything around it. great_cto runs Claude Code as a pipeline of 70 specialist agents — an independent model checks each stage before the next builds on it, spending caps refuse rather than warn, and three decisions stay yours: what gets built, how, and whether it ships.
Repo: avelikiy/great_cto
great_cto's own committed aesthetic — the instrument panel. Dark five-step surface ladder, exactly one accent, two faces divided by MEANING (Geist speaks,…
Analyze images, websites, and Figma files to extract their design and generate a `design.md` with token system, component inventory, and reconstruction notes.…
Shared review framework that every domain reviewer (pci, oracle, gov, edtech, healthcare, mlops, etc.) MUST follow. Defines the output artifact (TM-{slug}.md),…
Structured idea generation + multi-LLM debate for the product-owner stage. Diverge (generate genuinely different bets), debate (a 4-persona panel on 4 models…
How to write — and how to use — a skill that IS one aesthetic rather than a catalogue of them. A catalogue lets an agent pick, and it picks the modal option; a…
Standardized cost-estimation framework for great_cto plans. Forces explicit LLM cost, infra cost, human-supervision time, and the (defensible) human-equivalent…