Briefs · engineering

Code Architecture Review

Pressure-test a system design before you commit to it.

You walk away with

A verdict on the design with the riskiest decisions and concrete alternatives.

Decidi convenes

🏛️ The Software Architect 🏗️ The CTO 🛰️ The Reliability Engineer 🔐 The Security Engineer ⚡ The Performance Engineer 🔧 The Pragmatist

Recommended level: Deep — The newest, most capable models — for when being wrong is expensive.

What the council debates

Review this architecture / system design and argue the trade-offs out.

THE DESIGN:
[describe or paste the architecture — components, data flow, key choices, tech stack]
CONSTRAINTS: [scale, team, latency/throughput needs, deadlines]
WHAT WORRIES YOU: [your own doubts, if any]

Debate:
1. Boundaries and coupling — are the seams in the right places; what is hard to change later.
2. Accidental complexity and premature abstraction versus genuinely needed flexibility.
3. The data model and ownership — single source of truth, consistency, migrations.
4. Failure modes — what breaks, the blast radius, recovery and observability.
5. Scale — where this design hits a wall and what it costs to fix then.
6. Security and trust boundaries.
7. The simplest design that would still meet the real requirements.

FINAL SYNTHESIS:
- A verdict: sound / sound-with-changes / rethink.
- The one or two decisions that are hardest to reverse, and the recommendation on each.
- A concrete list of changes, severity-ranked, with the reasoning.

Run this brief as a council

Related briefs

Security Threat Model

Red-team a system to find how an attacker would actually break it.

Tech-Stack Selection

Choose the right stack without falling for hype or sunk cost.

Build vs Buy Decision

Decide whether to build it, buy it, or partner — with eyes open.

Incident Post-Mortem

Run a blameless post-mortem that finds the real systemic cause.