Architecture Review

Run structured architecture review sessions with prospects. AI generates assessment frameworks, current/future state gap analysis, risk matrices, and recommendation documents.

Skill Details

Install this skill

Versionv1.0.0AuthorJorge ArteagaLicenseMITSections17

Works with

Claude CodeCursorWindsurf

When This Skill Owns the TaskWorkflow

Required Context to Gather FirstWorkflow

Before running or preparing an architecture review, ask for or infer:

1

Review type — Existing org assessment, new solution design, or migration review?

2

Salesforce products in scope — Sales Cloud, Service Cloud, Platform, etc.?

3

Current org maturity — Startup/new, mid-mature, or complex/legacy org?

4

Known concerns — Governor limits, data model issues, performance, security gaps?

5

Audience — Technical architects, business stakeholders, or mixed?

6

Duration — 90-min session, half-day, or full-day workshop?

7

Desired output — Verbal briefing, slide deck, or written assessment report?

WorkflowWorkflow

1

Scope the review — Define which architecture domains to assess based on the deal.

2

Build the agenda — Use the three-phase structure: Current State / Gap Analysis / Future State.

3

Prepare assessment questions — Pull from the relevant domain checklists below.

4

Run the session — Facilitate; capture findings; defer design debates to sf-se-whiteboard.

5

Score each domain — Apply the domain scoring table.

6

Identify top risks — Classify each risk by severity and likelihood.

7

Produce recommendations — Map to Well-Architected pillars: Trusted / Easy / Adaptable.

8

Deliver the output — Use the assessment report template.

Core Frameworks

Salesforce Well-Architected Framework

All recommendations should map to one or more of the three pillars:

Architecture Review Domains

Assess each domain during the review session:

#### 1. Data Model & Object Design

Custom objects: naming conventions, relationships, sharing model alignment
Field proliferation and unused fields
Data volume: record counts, archiving strategy
Master data management: duplicate rules, matching rules

#### 2. Automation Architecture

Flow vs. Apex vs. Process Builder inventory
Order of execution awareness
Governor limit exposure in bulk operations
Automation sprawl: how many automations touch the same object?

#### 3. Integration Architecture

Integration patterns in use: REST, SOAP, Bulk API, Platform Events
Named Credentials and authentication management
Error handling and retry logic
API version management

#### 4. Security & Sharing Model

Organization-Wide Defaults (OWDs)
Role hierarchy complexity
Profile vs. Permission Set usage
Field-Level Security gaps
Connected App governance

#### 5. User Experience & Adoption

Lightning Experience adoption rate
Page layout complexity and user feedback
Mobile usage and configuration
Training and documentation state

#### 6. DevOps & Release Management

Source control usage (Git + SFDX)
Deployment pipeline (scratch orgs, sandboxes, CI/CD)
Test coverage and test data strategy
Change management process

Risk Classification Matrix

Output FormatTemplate

Architecture Review Agenda

MARKDOWN

# Architecture Review — [Company Name]
**Date:** [Date] | **Duration:** [X] hours | **SE:** [Name]

## Session Goals
1. Understand current architecture state across [domains in scope]
2. Identify technical risks and gaps
3. Align on future state architecture and recommendations

## Agenda
| Time | Topic | Format |
|------|-------|--------|
| 0:00-0:15 | Introductions and objectives | Discussion |
| 0:15-0:45 | Current state: [Domain 1] | Q&A |
| 0:45-1:15 | Current state: [Domain 2] | Q&A |
| 1:15-1:45 | Gap analysis discussion | Whiteboard |
| 1:45-2:00 | Risks, priorities, and next steps | Discussion |

## Prep We Need From You
- [ ] Org login access (view-only is fine)
- [ ] List of current integrations and connected systems
- [ ] Any known pain points or performance issues
- [ ] Org health check report (if available)

Architecture Assessment Report

MARKDOWN

# Architecture Assessment — [Company Name]
**Date:** [Date] | **SE:** [Name] | **Version:** 1.0

## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentences: overall health, top 2 strengths, top 2 concerns]

## Scope
- Products assessed: [List]
- Domains reviewed: [List]
- Data sources: [Session notes / Org access / Documentation provided]

## Domain Assessments

### [Domain Name] — Score: [X/20] — [Green / Yellow / Red]

**Current State:**
[What we found — factual, evidence-based]

**Risks Identified:**
| Risk | Severity | Likelihood | Priority |
|------|----------|-----------|----------|
| [Risk] | H/M/L | H/M/L | Critical/High/Medium/Low |

**Recommendations:**
1. [Specific recommendation — maps to Trusted / Easy / Adaptable]
2. [Specific recommendation]

---

## Consolidated Risk Register

| Domain | Risk | Severity | Priority | Recommendation |
|--------|------|----------|----------|---------------|
| [Domain] | [Risk] | H/M/L | [Priority] | [Action] |

## Recommended Roadmap

### Immediate (0-30 days)
- [Action]

### Short-term (30-90 days)
- [Action]

### Medium-term (90-180 days)
- [Action]

## Well-Architected Alignment

| Pillar | Current State | Target State |
|--------|--------------|-------------|
| **Trusted** | [Current] | [Target] |
| **Easy** | [Current] | [Target] |
| **Adaptable** | [Current] | [Target] |

Anti-PatternsReference

Scoring Rubric (100 Points)Reference

Cross-Skill IntegrationReference

Task	This Skill	Defer To
Plan and run an architecture review session	Yes	—
Assess an existing Salesforce org	Yes	—
Produce a current/future state gap analysis	Yes	—
Generate a risk matrix and recommendations	Yes	—
Design a net-new solution from a blank slate	No	sf-se-whiteboard
Run business discovery before the technical review	No	sf-se-discovery
Write the technical section of an RFP response	No	sf-se-rfp
Pillar	Principle	Key Questions
Trusted	Secure, compliant, and reliable	Who has access to what data? Are there compliance requirements? What's the disaster recovery plan?
Easy	Simple, adoptable, and maintainable	Is the org over-customized? Are automations understandable by admins? Is technical debt accumulating?
Adaptable	Scalable, extensible, and future-proof	Can the org handle 10x data volume? Can new products be added without a rebuild? Is the integration architecture decoupled?
Severity	Likelihood	Priority	Action
High	High	Critical	Address before any new work
High	Low	High	Remediation roadmap within 90 days
Low	High	Medium	Monitor; include in next sprint
Low	Low	Low	Document; address opportunistically
Anti-Pattern	Why It Fails	Fix
Reviewing the org without access	Findings are speculative, not evidence-based	Request view-only org access before the session
Diving into solution design during the review	Turns an assessment into a design session; you don't have enough information yet	Capture design ideas for follow-up; defer to sf-se-whiteboard
Only talking to one technical person	Misses the full picture; technical debt often lives in undocumented tribal knowledge	Interview the admin, the architect, and at least one power user
Producing a report with only problems, no priorities	Overwhelms the customer; they don't know where to start	Always rank risks and sequence the roadmap
Assessing everything to the same depth	Wastes time on low-risk areas; misses critical ones	Ask up front what's causing the most pain; start there
Not following up on the report	The customer sees a list of problems with no Salesforce solution	Every risk in the report should have a Salesforce recommendation
Category	Points	Pass Criteria
Coverage	20	At least 4 domains assessed
Evidence Quality	25	Findings are based on observed facts, not assumptions
Risk Prioritization	20	Each risk classified by severity and likelihood
Recommendations	25	Every critical/high risk has a specific Salesforce recommendation
Roadmap Clarity	10	Actions sequenced in 0-30 / 30-90 / 90-180 day tiers
Skill	When to Use It
sf-se-whiteboard	Design the future-state solution after the assessment is complete
sf-se-discovery	Run business discovery before or alongside the technical review
sf-se-proof-of-value	Quantify the cost of the risks identified in the assessment
sf-se-rfp	Use the architecture assessment as input to a technical RFP response
sf-se-presentation	Build the slide deck version of the assessment report
salesforce-architect-skill	Deep-dive on specific architecture decisions (automation, data model, integration)

More in Solution Design

Proof of Value

Solution Design

Build business cases and ROI models. AI calculates quantified outcomes, TCO comparisons, time-to-value estimates, and produces executive-ready PoV documents.

Solution Whiteboard

Solution Design

Facilitate solution design and whiteboard sessions. AI produces structured solution outlines, data flow diagrams, integration maps, and phased implementation roadmaps.

Navigate Solution Design