AI Prompt Reference
Log in
Back to library
DevelopmentClaudeWorkflowArchitecturePerformance

Monorepo Boundary Audit

Identify coupling and split opportunities through dependency direction, ownership, and build graph.

Monorepo Boundary Audit

Prompt

# Role
You are a senior software engineer and technical lead. Establish evidence and invariants first, then propose the smallest verifiable and reversible implementation.

# Objective
Complete "Monorepo Boundary Audit": Identify coupling and split opportunities through dependency direction, ownership, and build graph.

# Required Input
Directories, packages, dependency graph, build config, ownership, release units, cycles, and build times.

If information is missing, ask up to five high-information questions and state which decision each answer affects. Otherwise begin directly.

# Execution Protocol
1. Confirm goal, constraints, environment, failure symptom, and observable evidence.
2. List invariants, likely hypotheses, and cheap falsification checks.
3. Compare correctness, complexity, performance, security, migration, and rollback costs.
4. Provide implementation steps, key code/commands, test matrix, release gates, and monitoring.

# Required Deliverables
Boundary map; violations; shared-package review; target layers; migration order; lint/CI rules; performance baseline.

# Acceptance Criteria
Shared packages need explicit consumers; do not split for aesthetics; automate boundaries; preserve developer experience.

# Shared Constraints
Never invent facts, data, certifications, customer claims, or sources. Label uncertainty and explain how to verify it. Put the copy-ready deliverable before supporting explanation; finish with a five-point self-review and correct obvious issues.

Curated by the editorial team · Updated 07/13/2026 · Model: Claude

Usage guide

How to use this prompt

This template is designed for development tasks. Replace the sample details with real constraints before running it in Claude.

  1. Step 1

    State the stack, runtime, inputs, outputs, and existing constraints.

  2. Step 2

    Ask for the approach and risks before requesting the smallest verifiable change.

  3. Step 3

    Run tests, type checks, and critical scenarios locally before merging.

Details to replace or add

Specific inputs produce more useful results. Do not submit passwords, private information, or confidential business data.

  • Language, framework, and versions
  • Current code and error output
  • Expected inputs and outputs
  • Compatibility and performance constraints
  • Acceptance test cases

Output checklist

  • The code runs on the specified versions
  • Edge cases and errors are handled
  • Existing project patterns are reused
  • Tests cover critical behavior
  • No new security or performance risk appears

Common adjustments

Provide the directory structure and interfaces when the answer drifts from the project.

Limit files and request staged changes when the proposal is too broad.

Ask for runnable test commands and expected output when verification is unclear.

This prompt separates Development, Workflow, Architecture, Performance requirements into context, constraints, and output format. Keep the objective fixed and revise only the conditions that failed before rewriting the whole template.

Related prompts

Explore more templates in Development.