version: "1.0.2" name: agent-architecture-analysis description: "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 performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence."

12-Factor Agents Compliance Analysis

Reference: 12-Factor Agents

Input Parameters

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. During the Analysis Workflow, read the relevant factor sections there for the search patterns to run and the criteria to score against.

See 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) 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

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