/tactical-ddd
Detects anemic domain models, validates and refactors them into rich domain models, and enforces tactical DDD patterns (Entities, Value Objects, Aggregates, Domain Services, Domain Events). Use when the user asks to validate, review, or check domain models or DDD code; detect
$ npx -y skills add tech-leads-club/agent-skills --skill tactical-ddd --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/tactical-ddd
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Detects anemic domain models, validates and refactors them into rich domain models, and enforces tactical DDD patterns (Entities, Value Objects, Aggregates, Domain Services, Domain Events). Use when the user asks to validate, review, or check domain models or DDD code; detect
SKILL.md
tactical-ddd.SKILL.mdname: tactical-ddd
description: Detects anemic domain models, validates and refactors them into rich domain models, and enforces tactical DDD patterns (Entities, Value Objects, Aggregates, Domain Services, Domain Events). Use when the user asks to validate, review, or check domain models or DDD code; detect anemia; refactor domain objects; improve encapsulation; or mentions terms like "anemic model", "rich domain", "aggregate", "value object", "domain event", "ubiquitous language", "is this good DDD", "does this follow DDD", or "check my domain". Do NOT use for module or service boundary design, architectural decomposition, strategic DDD context mapping, or code outside the domain layer (DTOs, controllers, infrastructure adapters).
Tactical DDD — Rich Domain Modeling
Workflow
Determine the user's intent first:
| Intent | Phases to run | |--------|--------------| | "validate / review / check / is this correct?" | Phase 1 + 2 only → report findings, ask before refactoring | | "fix / refactor / improve / clean up" | Phase 1 + 2 + 3 | | "how should I design / model this?" | Load [reference.md](reference.md) directly |
Phase 1 — Detect
Load [detection.md](detection.md) and scan the target code for anemia signals. Produce a severity score and list of affected classes.
Phase 2 — Assess
For each affected class, determine the correct building block:
| Has unique identity tracked over time? | Has invariants tying multiple objects? | → Building Block | |----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------| | Yes | — | **Entity** | | No | — | **Value Object** | | Yes (root) + children with shared invariants | Yes | **Aggregate** | | Operation spans multiple Aggregates/doesn't belong to any | — | **Domain Service** |
Prefer Value Objects over Entities. Prefer small Aggregates over large ones.
**If intent was validate/review**: stop here. Report findings using the output format below. Ask "Would you like me to apply these fixes?" before proceeding.
Phase 3 — Refactor
Load [refactoring.md](refactoring.md) for step-by-step moves. Apply in this order: 1. Replace setter chains with a single expressive method 2. Move service logic into the Aggregate that owns it 3. Add business guards at the top of each method 4. Publish a Domain Event after each successful state change 5. Replace primitive types with Value Objects
For deep pattern questions (boundary design, event modeling, service vs. entity decision), load [reference.md](reference.md).
---
Quick Anemia Signals (scan first)
public setX() / public setY() → behaviour should be encapsulated
service.doX(entity, ...) → logic likely belongs in entity
entity.setA(); entity.setB(); ... → setter chain = missing intent method
no domain methods beyond getters → pure data bag
---
Golden Rules
1. **Behaviour with data** — Objects own both state and the operations that change it 2. **Ubiquitous Language** — Method names come from the domain, not CRUD (`commitTo`, not `setStatus`) 3. **Small Aggregates** — Root + Value Objects by default; add child Entities only for true invariants 4. **One transaction = one Aggregate** — Cross-Aggregate rules use eventual consistency via Domain Events 5. **Reference by ID** — Never hold object references to other Aggregates 6. **Value Objects first** — Use Entities only when individual identity is essential 7. **Domain Services sparingly** — Excessive services → anemic model 8. **Protect invariants** — The Aggregate is the last line of defence; never trust the caller
---
Output Format
When reviewing code, report:
## Anemia Diagnosis: <ClassName>
Severity: [None | Mild | Moderate | Severe]
Issues:
- <description of problem>
Recommended refactoring:
- <specific move from refactoring.md>
When refactoring, show a before/after diff for each class touched.
Read more
name: tactical-ddd description: Detects anemic domain models, validates and refactors them into rich domain models, and enforces tactical DDD patterns (Entities, Value Objects, Aggregates, Domain Services, Domain Events). Use when the user asks to validate, review, or check domain models or DDD code; detect anemia; refactor domain objects; improve encapsulation; or mentions terms like "anemic model", "rich domain", "aggregate", "value object", "domain event", "ubiquitous language", "is this good DDD", "does this follow DDD", or "check my domain". Do NOT use for module or service boundary design, architectural decomposition, strategic DDD context mapping, or code outside the domain layer (DTOs, controllers, infrastructure adapters).
Tactical DDD — Rich Domain Modeling
Workflow
Determine the user's intent first:
| Intent | Phases to run | |--------|--------------| | "validate / review / check / is this correct?" | Phase 1 + 2 only → report findings, ask before refactoring | | "fix / refactor / improve / clean up" | Phase 1 + 2 + 3 | | "how should I design / model this?" | Load [reference.md](reference.md) directly |
Phase 1 — Detect
Load [detection.md](detection.md) and scan the target code for anemia signals. Produce a severity score and list of affected classes.
Phase 2 — Assess
For each affected class, determine the correct building block:
| Has unique identity tracked over time? | Has invariants tying multiple objects? | → Building Block | |----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------| | Yes | — | **Entity** | | No | — | **Value Object** | | Yes (root) + children with shared invariants | Yes | **Aggregate** | | Operation spans multiple Aggregates/doesn't belong to any | — | **Domain Service** |
Prefer Value Objects over Entities. Prefer small Aggregates over large ones.
**If intent was validate/review**: stop here. Report findings using the output format below. Ask "Would you like me to apply these fixes?" before proceeding.
Phase 3 — Refactor
Load [refactoring.md](refactoring.md) for step-by-step moves. Apply in this order: 1. Replace setter chains with a single expressive method 2. Move service logic into the Aggregate that owns it 3. Add business guards at the top of each method 4. Publish a Domain Event after each successful state change 5. Replace primitive types with Value Objects
For deep pattern questions (boundary design, event modeling, service vs. entity decision), load [reference.md](reference.md).
---
Quick Anemia Signals (scan first)
public setX() / public setY() → behaviour should be encapsulated service.doX(entity, ...) → logic likely belongs in entity entity.setA(); entity.setB(); ... → setter chain = missing intent method no domain methods beyond getters → pure data bag
---
Golden Rules
1. **Behaviour with data** — Objects own both state and the operations that change it 2. **Ubiquitous Language** — Method names come from the domain, not CRUD (`commitTo`, not `setStatus`) 3. **Small Aggregates** — Root + Value Objects by default; add child Entities only for true invariants 4. **One transaction = one Aggregate** — Cross-Aggregate rules use eventual consistency via Domain Events 5. **Reference by ID** — Never hold object references to other Aggregates 6. **Value Objects first** — Use Entities only when individual identity is essential 7. **Domain Services sparingly** — Excessive services → anemic model 8. **Protect invariants** — The Aggregate is the last line of defence; never trust the caller
---
Output Format
When reviewing code, report:
## Anemia Diagnosis: <ClassName> Severity: [None | Mild | Moderate | Severe] Issues: - <description of problem> Recommended refactoring: - <specific move from refactoring.md>
When refactoring, show a before/after diff for each class touched.
The secure, validated skill registry for professional AI coding agents. Extend Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and more with absolute confidence.
Repo: tech-leads-club/agent-skills
Other skills on tech-leads-club-agent-skills.
- /component-common-domain-detection
Finds duplicate business logic spread across multiple components and suggests consolidation. Use when asking "where is this logic duplicated?", "find common code between services", "what can be consolidated?", "detect shared domain logic", or analyzing component overlap before
Open skill - /component-flattening-analysis
Detects misplaced classes and fixes component hierarchy problems — finds code that should belong inside a component but sits at the root level. Use when asking "clean up component structure", "find orphaned classes", "fix module hierarchy", "flatten nested components", or
Open skill - /component-identification-sizing
Maps architectural components in a codebase and measures their size to identify what should be extracted first. Use when asking "how big is each module?", "what components do I have?", "which service is too large?", "analyze codebase structure", "size my monolith", or planning
Open skill - /coupling-analysis
Analyzes coupling between modules using the three-dimensional model (strength, distance, volatility) from "Balancing Coupling in Software Design". Use when asking "are these modules too coupled?", "show me dependencies", "analyze integration quality", "which modules should I
Open skill - /decomposition-planning-roadmap
Creates step-by-step decomposition plans and migration roadmaps for breaking apart monolithic applications. Use when asking "what order should I extract services?", "plan my migration", "create a decomposition roadmap", "prioritize what to split", "monolith to microservices
Open skill - /domain-analysis
Maps business domains and suggests service boundaries in any codebase using DDD Strategic Design. Use when asking "what are the domains in this codebase?", "where should I draw service boundaries?", "identify bounded contexts", "classify subdomains", "DDD analysis", or analyzing
Open skill

