Back to skills
SkillHub ClubResearch & OpsFull Stack

implementation-approach

Selects implementation strategy (vertical/horizontal/hybrid) with risk assessment. Use when: planning features or deciding development approach.

Packaged view

This page reorganizes the original catalog entry around fit, installability, and workflow context first. The original raw source lives below.

Stars
37
Hot score
90
Updated
March 20, 2026
Overall rating
C2.1
Composite score
2.1
Best-practice grade
A88.4

Install command

npx @skill-hub/cli install shinpr-agentic-code-implementation-approach

Repository

shinpr/agentic-code

Skill path: .agents/skills/implementation-approach

Selects implementation strategy (vertical/horizontal/hybrid) with risk assessment. Use when: planning features or deciding development approach.

Open repository

Best for

Primary workflow: Research & Ops.

Technical facets: Full Stack.

Target audience: everyone.

License: Unknown.

Original source

Catalog source: SkillHub Club.

Repository owner: shinpr.

This is still a mirrored public skill entry. Review the repository before installing into production workflows.

What it helps with

  • Install implementation-approach into Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, or OpenCode workflows
  • Review https://github.com/shinpr/agentic-code before adding implementation-approach to shared team environments
  • Use implementation-approach for development workflows

Works across

Claude CodeCodex CLIGemini CLIOpenCode

Favorites: 0.

Sub-skills: 0.

Aggregator: No.

Original source / Raw SKILL.md

---
name: implementation-approach
description: "Selects implementation strategy (vertical/horizontal/hybrid) with risk assessment. Use when: planning features or deciding development approach."
---

# Implementation Strategy Selection Framework (Meta-cognitive Approach)

An implementation strategy selection framework based on meta-cognitive thinking. Derives optimal implementation approaches through a systematic decision process from understanding existing implementations to constraint compatibility.

## Meta-cognitive Strategy Selection Process

### Step 1: Comprehensive Current State Analysis

**Core Question**: "What does the existing implementation look like?"

#### Analysis Framework
```yaml
Architecture Analysis:
  - Current responsibility separation and improvement potential
  - Data flow identification and evaluation
  - Dependency visualization and impact scope
  - Technical debt quantification

Implementation Quality Assessment:
  - Code quality and maintainability
  - Test coverage and reliability
  - Performance characteristics
  - Security considerations

Historical Context Understanding:
  - Why did it become the current form?
  - Validity check of past decisions
  - Changes in technical constraints
  - Evolution of business requirements
```

#### Meta-cognitive Question List
- What is the true responsibility of this implementation?
- Which parts are business essence and which derive from technical constraints?
- What dependencies or implicit preconditions are unclear from the code?
- What benefits and constraints does the current design bring?

### Step 2: Strategy Exploration and Creation

**Core Question**: "When determining before → after, what implementation patterns or strategies should be referenced?"

#### Strategy Discovery Process
```yaml
Research and Exploration:
  - Implementation examples and patterns from similar tech stacks (research online)
  - Approach collection from projects handling similar challenges
  - Open source implementation references
  - Technical literature and blog research

Creative Thinking:
  - Sequential/parallel application of multiple strategies
  - Design based on project time/human/technical constraints
  - Phase division and milestone setting
  - Pre-design of necessary extension points
```

#### Reference Strategy Patterns (Creative Combinations Encouraged)

**Legacy Handling Strategies**:
- Strangler Pattern: Gradual migration through phased replacement
- Facade Pattern: Complexity hiding through unified interface
- Adapter Pattern: Bridge with existing systems

**New Development Strategies**:
- Feature-driven Development: Vertical implementation prioritizing user value
- Foundation-driven Development: Foundation-first construction prioritizing stability
- Risk-driven Development: Prioritize addressing maximum risk elements

**Integration/Migration Strategies**:
- Proxy Pattern: Transparent feature extension
- Decorator Pattern: Phased enhancement of existing features
- Bridge Pattern: Flexibility through abstraction

**Important**: The optimal solution is discovered through creative thinking according to each project's context.

### Step 3: Risk Assessment and Control

**Core Question**: "What risks arise when applying this to existing implementation, and what's the best way to control them?"

#### Risk Analysis Matrix
```yaml
Technical Risks:
  - Impact on existing systems
  - Data consistency assurance
  - Performance degradation possibility
  - Integration complexity

Operational Risks:
  - Service availability impact
  - Deployment downtime
  - Monitoring/operation process changes
  - Failure rollback procedures

Project Risks:
  - Schedule delay possibility
  - Technology learning costs
  - Quality requirement achievement
  - Cross-team coordination complexity
```

#### Risk Control Strategies
```yaml
Preventive Measures:
  - Phased migration to new system without service disruption
  - Verification through parallel operation of old and new systems
  - Addition of integration and regression tests for new features
  - Pre-implementation setup of performance and error monitoring

Incident Response:
  - Clarify rollback procedures and conditions to old system
  - Prepare log analysis and metrics dashboards
  - Define communication system and role assignments for failures
  - Document partial service continuation procedures
```

### Step 4: Constraint Compatibility Verification

**Core Question**: "What are this project's constraints?"

#### Constraint Checklist
```yaml
Technical Constraints:
  - Compatibility with existing libraries/frameworks
  - Server resource, network, database capacity limits
  - Mandatory requirements like data protection, access control, audit logging
  - Numerical targets like response time <5 seconds, 99.9% uptime

Temporal Constraints:
  - Project deadlines and priorities
  - Dependencies with other projects
  - Milestone/release plans
  - Learning/acquisition period considerations

Resource Constraints:
  - Team size, new technology learning time, existing skill sets
  - Developer work hours, server resources, operational system allocation
  - Project budget ceiling, running cost ceiling
  - External vendor support deadlines, SLAs, contract terms

Business Constraints:
  - Market launch timing requirements
  - Customer impact minimization requirements
  - Regulatory/industry standard compliance
```

### Step 5: Implementation Approach Decision

Select optimal solution from basic implementation approaches (creative combinations encouraged):

#### Vertical Slice (Feature-driven)
**Characteristics**: Vertical implementation across all layers by feature unit
**Application Conditions**: Low inter-feature dependencies, output in user-usable form, changes needed across all architecture layers
**Verification Method**: End-user value delivery at each feature completion

#### Horizontal Slice (Foundation-driven)
**Characteristics**: Phased construction by architecture layer
**Application Conditions**: Foundation system stability important, multiple features depend on common foundation, layer-by-layer verification effective
**Verification Method**: Integrated operation verification when all foundation layers complete

#### Hybrid (Creative Combination)
**Characteristics**: Flexible combination according to project characteristics
**Application Conditions**: Unclear requirements, need to change approach per phase, transition from prototyping to full implementation
**Verification Method**: Verify at appropriate L1/L2/L3 levels according to each phase's goals

### Step 6: Decision Rationale Documentation

**Design Doc Documentation**: Clearly specify implementation strategy selection reasons and rationale.

## Verification Level Definitions

Priority for completion verification of each task:

- **L1: Functional Operation Verification** - Operates as end-user feature (e.g., search executable)
- **L2: Test Operation Verification** - New tests added and passing (e.g., type definition tests)
- **L3: Build Success Verification** - No compile errors (e.g., interface definitions)

**Priority**: L1 > L2 > L3 in order of verifiability importance

## Integration Point Definitions

Define integration points according to selected strategy:
- **Strangler-based**: When switching between old and new systems for each feature
- **Feature-driven**: When users can actually use the feature
- **Foundation-driven**: When all architecture layers are ready and E2E tests pass
- **Hybrid**: When individual goals defined for each phase are achieved

## Anti-patterns

- **Pattern Fixation**: Selecting only from listed strategies without considering unique combinations
- **Insufficient Analysis**: Skipping Step 1 analysis framework before strategy selection
- **Risk Neglect**: Starting implementation without Step 3 risk analysis matrix
- **Constraint Ignorance**: Deciding strategy without checking Step 4 constraint checklist
- **Rationale Omission**: Selecting strategy without using Step 6 documentation template

## Guidelines for Meta-cognitive Execution

1. **Leverage Known Patterns**: Use as starting point, explore creative combinations
2. **Active Web Research**: Research implementation examples from similar tech stacks
3. **Apply 5 Whys**: Pursue root causes to grasp essence
4. **Multi-perspective Evaluation**: Comprehensively evaluate from each Step 1-4 perspective
5. **Creative Thinking**: Consider sequential application of multiple strategies and designs leveraging project-specific constraints
6. **Clarify Decision Rationale**: Make strategy selection rationale explicit in design documents
implementation-approach | SkillHub