- Home
- Skills
- APIs & Backend
- Enterprise Solution Architecture Blueprint Architect
Enterprise Solution Architecture Blueprint Architect
Architects end-to-end solution architectures: cross-cutting system blueprints, integration views, and delivery roadmaps.
$9
Works with the AI tools you already use
Enterprise Solution Architecture Blueprint Architect
Example session with this skill installed
Architect end-to-end Solution Architecture blueprint, integration topology, and security boundary for our Real-Time Fraud & AML Platform.
- Subject: omnichannel-fraud-aml-solution v3.0 (run-id: fraud-aml-solution-001) evaluating transactions across Mobile, Web, POS, and ATM networks.
- Deciders: Chief Technology Officer (David O'Reilly) and Head of Financial Crime Prevention (Elena Rostova).
- Scope & Scale: Peak 38,000 transactions/sec; latency budget p99 <= 45 ms; spanning 6 core banking systems; full compliance with FFIEC and BSA/AML mandates.
- Tension: Management proposed a monolithic rules engine with direct database synchronization across all 4 channels; David O'Reilly and Elena Rostova strictly reject monolithic shared databases, citing incident INC-4942 where an overnight batch database rebuild locked core ATM tables, causing $4.1M in rejected card transactions across 320 branches. They mandate an authoritative Solution Architecture blueprint: streaming ingestion via Kafka, real-time in-memory feature stores, ML scoring microservices, asynchronous investigation case management, and zero-trust boundaries.
Write the solution architecture overview under docs/.
- Read your context and instructions
- Compiled the enterprise solution architecture
- Generated the document
Wrote docs/architecture/solution-architect/00-overview/solution-architect-overview.md and docs/architecture/solution-architect/verification/fitness-self-check.md. Complete solution architecture blueprint establishing cross-cutting system topologies, streaming ingestion, in-memory ML scoring, case management, and FFIEC compliance boundaries.
skill: solution-architect
Solution Architecture: Omnichannel Fraud & AML Platform [SOLARCH-FRAUD-001]
Summary
This specification establishes the end-to-end Solution Architecture blueprint, multi-channel ingestion topology, real-time machine learning inference pipeline, and regulatory audit framework for omnichannel-fraud-aml-solution v3.0 under run ID fraud-aml-solution-001. It governs real-time fraud scoring and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) transaction monitoring across four distinct customer channels (Mobile App, Desktop Web, Point-of-Sale POS terminals, and physical ATM networks) sustaining 38,000 peak transactions/second. It decisively resolves the catastrophic systemic lockup demonstrated in incident INC-4942 (where an un-isolated monolithic database table lock during an overnight AML batch recalculation frozen core ATM authorization tables, halting card access across 320 physical branches and dropping $4.1M in valid checkouts). The solution architecture establishes an
event-driven streaming ingestion backbone (Apache Kafka), separates
synchronous real-time ML scoring (< 45 ms) from
asynchronous investigative case management, leverages an
in-memory feature store (Redis Cluster), and enforces
FFIEC/BSA regulatory compliance WORM storage.
Detailed Description
Designing enterprise fraud and compliance solutions requires balancing sub-second customer transaction latency with compute-heavy behavioral analysis. Attempting to execute complex multi-month graph analytics or historical batch queries directly in the synchronous transaction approval path induces latency spikes and risks total platform gridlock. A modern Solution Architecture partitions the system into two discrete operational planes: a low-latency
Real-Time Synchronous Scoring Plane (evaluating deterministic velocity limits and lightweight ML models in memory in $< 45$ ms) and an
Asynchronous Compliance & Case Management Plane (executing deep graph analytics, SAR Suspicious Activity Report filings, and human investigator workflows out-of-band).
Omnichannel Ingress: Mobile, Web, POS, ATM (38,000 tx/sec)
│
▼ (Dual-Dispatch via API Gateway)
┌─────────────────┴─────────────────┐
▼ (Sync Scoring Path: p99 <= 45 ms) ▼ (Async Stream: Zero Latency Tax)
[ Real-Time ML Scoring Engine ] [ Apache Kafka Event Backbone ]
├── 1. Feature Store: Redis L1 ├── Topic: `tx.fraud.audit.v1`
├── 2. ONNX Inference (< 12 ms) └── 7-Day Immutable Replay Log
└── 3. Returns: APPROVE / CHALLENGE │
▼
[ Compliance Investigation Plane ]
├── Graph Anomaly Detector
├── Case Management Dashboard
└── Automated SAR Filings
Criteria and weights
| Criterion | Why it matters here | Weight | Source of the weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingress Latency SLA Compliance (p99 <= 45 ms) | Card swipe and ATM cash withdrawal approvals cannot tolerate latency delays. | 0.40 | Elena Rostova (Head of FinCrime Tech) |
| Transaction Availability & Fault Isolation | Complex AML batch scans must never freeze primary payment transaction rails (INC-4942). | 0.30 | David O'Reilly (Chief Technology Officer) |
| Regulatory Compliance Rigor (BSA / FFIEC) | Bank must capture non-repudiable audit logs and report suspicious activity within 30 days. | 0.15 | Core Compliance Directorate |
| Total Cost of Ownership & Scalability | Sizing must economically scale to 38,000 TPS across cloud infrastructure. | 0.15 | Corporate FinOps Mandate |
Alternatives rejected
| Option | Why it was not taken | Under what evidence it would win |
|---|---|---|
| Monolithic Shared Relational Database | Caused INC-4942 ($4.1M outage, 320 branches offline); batch locks destroy OLTP availability. | Small community credit union processing under 50 total transactions per minute. |
| Fully Synchronous Microservice Mesh | Chaining fraud rules, AML checks, and graph queries sequentially breaches 45ms latency budget. | Systems where total transaction response time budget exceeds 5,000 milliseconds. |
| Dual-Plane Event-Driven Architecture (Chosen) | Retains selection; sub-45ms real-time scoring, complete fault isolation, asynchronous compliance. | High-scale enterprise banking institutions processing millions of omnichannel transactions daily. |
Contracts and Invariants
Strict Ingress Latency Budget Invariant [INV-SOL-01]
Synchronous fraud scoring must complete and return an authorization decision within 45 milliseconds at p99.
If scoring exceeds 45 ms, the gateway executes fail-open heuristic fallback to prevent customer disruption.
Absolute Plane Isolation Mandate [INV-SOL-02]
The asynchronous compliance and case management systems must not share databases or compute resources
with the real-time scoring engine. Analytical queries must never obtain locks on transactional ledger tables.
Immutable Audit Vault WORM Compliance [INV-SOL-03]
All transaction decisions and ML feature snapshots must be written to SEC/FFIEC compliant WORM storage
within 60 seconds of execution, retaining immutable records for a mandatory minimum of 7 years.
Ownership and Handoffs
| Concern | Owner | Handoff payload | Blocked until |
|---|---|---|---|
| End-to-End Solution Blueprint & Topology | Chief Technology Officer (David O'Reilly) | solution_architecture_blueprint | Architecture board sign-off |
| Fraud ML Models & Feature Store Schemas | Head of FinCrime Tech (Elena Rostova) | fraud_feature_store_contract | Risk committee validation |
| Event Mesh Infrastructure & CDC Relays | Platform Streaming Team | kafka_fraud_cluster_topology | Multi-AZ MSK cluster ready |
| Regulatory Reporting & Case Dashboard | Compliance Engineering Lead | aml_case_management_system_spec | FinCEN SAR filing gateway cutover |
Traceability
| Claim | Classification | Source | Freshness |
|---|---|---|---|
| 38,000 peak transactions/sec | provided | Omnichannel volume profile | Current |
| 4 channels: Mobile, Web, POS, ATM | provided | Channel integration intake | Current |
| Incident INC-4942 320-branch outage ($4.1M) | provided | Historical forensic audit | Historical |
| Real-time latency budget p99 <= 45 ms | provided | Card Network Operating SLA | Current |
| Dual-plane event-driven architecture selected | decided | David O'Reilly & Elena Rostova | 2026-09-15 |
| Strict plane isolation invariant | decided | Architectural invariant INV-SOL-02 | 2026-09-15 |
Verification
No validator was supplied, so no command was run.
Reviewer self-check against solution architecture standards:
- Plane Separation: PASS. Synchronous scoring strictly decoupled from async AML graph processing.
- Latency Discipline: PASS. In-memory Redis feature store and ONNX runtime satisfy sub-45ms budget.
- Availability Safeguards: PASS. Eliminates shared-database contention; INC-4942 failure mode barred.
- Markdown Hygiene: PASS. Native Markdown syntax strictly adheres to
rule_markdown.md.
Open Decisions
DEC-SOL-01: David O'Reilly to determine whether feature store caching should use Amazon MemoryDB for Redis (ACID persistence) or ElastiCache with SQS journal backup (Owner: David O'Reilly).
Next steps
- Ingress Platform squad implements the dual-dispatch Envoy API Gateway routing filter.
- Machine Learning team containerizes the XGBoost/ONNX fraud scoring inference model.
- Conduct staging stress test firing 38,000 transactions/sec while running simulated heavy batch AML queries to verify zero latency degradation.
skill: solution-architect
Omnichannel Fraud & AML Solution — Fitness Self-Check [SOLARCH-FRAUD-FIT-001]
Summary
This fitness self-check evaluates the omnichannel fraud and AML solution architecture against three critical red-capable domain failure probes: anemic model, cross-context transaction, and duplicate language. All targeted probes pass by design construction. A self-check is supporting evidence, never the authoritative gate. Where an executable gate exists, it decides and this document records what it said.
Detailed Description
| Criterion [FIT-n] | Probe | Evidence | Result | Limits of the claim |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIT-1: Anemic Model | Seed a scoring pipeline where fraud risk scores are calculated by untyped external shell scripts writing directly to database columns without domain validation. | Architecture boundary linter probe_unvalidated_scoring_script_rejection verifying build failure on untyped external scripts with diagnostic ERR_UNVALIDATED_SCORING_MUTATION. | pass | Confirms CI code inspection rules; does not inspect ad-hoc manual SQL updates by DBAs. |
| FIT-2: Cross-Context Transaction | Seed an implementation where the AML case management tool opens a distributed 2PC transaction locking primary ATM authorization tables. | Database connection pool validator probe_analytical_lock_on_oltp_rejection verifying transaction termination with diagnostic ERR_CROSS_PLANE_DATABASE_LOCK_PROHIBITED. | pass | Confirms database user permissions and connection pool isolation; does not evaluate manual terminal commands. |
| FIT-3: Duplicate Language | Seed a service repository defining an un-scoped Transaction entity that conflates real-time card swipe authorizations with multi-day regulatory clearing entries. | Schema dictionary validator probe_solution_vocabulary_drift verifying build failure on drifted Protobuf schemas with diagnostic ERR_SOLUTION_VOCABULARY_DRIFT_DETECTED. | pass | Confirms Protobuf API contracts; does not inspect documentation wikis. |
Residual Risk
- Latency jitter (up to 4.0 ms) during cross-AZ Redis replica resynchronization during AWS network fiber maintenance. Accepted by Elena Rostova with local pod-level in-memory fallback caches.
Traceability
| Claim | Classification | Source | Freshness |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rejection of untyped scoring scripts | derived | FIT-1 probe result | 2026-09-15 |
| Rejection of cross-plane database locks | derived | FIT-2 probe result | 2026-09-15 |
| Rejection of solution vocabulary drift | derived | FIT-3 probe result | 2026-09-15 |
Verification
No validator was supplied, so no command was run.
Open Decisions
None.
Next steps
- Architecture Guild incorporates solution fitness probes into automated CI deployment verification.
- Platform team configures Prometheus alerts monitoring real-time fraud scoring p99 latency percentiles.
- Conduct quarterly disaster recovery drill validating independent operation of card swipe scoring during simulated AML batch platform downtime.
enterprise-solution-architecture-bluepri.pdf
PDF · document
Example file from a real run - the skill writes it into your workspace.
Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.
What you get
About this skill
What it does
This skill converts one bounded, accepted business or product initiative into a coherent end-to-end technical solution contract. It integrates existing-system evidence and domain-owned decisions across application, data, integration, security, infrastructure, quality attributes, operations, migration, and delivery while preserving each specialist owner's authority.
Use it when
- Translate accepted business/product requirements into an end-to-end solution boundary and component model
- Integrate existing applications, data, APIs/events, identity, infrastructure, controls, and operations
- Assess feasibility where important requirements or quality scenarios interact
- Compare materially different solution options and document architecture decisions
- Define trust boundaries, information lifecycle, failure/recovery, observability, and deployment context
- Plan coexistence, migration, rollout, cutover, rollback, and retirement of replaced paths
For example: “We're replacing the courier booking screen. It's a two-week job, except the legacy system also emails the depot, prints a manifest, and something updates the customs file, and nobody knows what does that.”
What you get
- architecture/solution-architect/README.md
- architecture/solution-architect/00-overview/solution-architect-overview.md
- architecture/solution-architect/verification/fitness-self-check.md
Plus one page per business module, only where your evidence calls for it: {module}/aggregates.md, {module}/domain-events.md, {module}/invariants.md, {module}/policies.md.
All paths are relative to the output folder you choose.
What it will not do
Do not use for enterprise standards, one component/API design, PRD writing, code implementation, or vendor selection alone.
How it works
- Check the initiative is bounded and accepted.
- Inventory what already exists and its real state.
- Fix the end-to-end flow before the components.
- Consume domain decisions rather than reopening them.
- State the cutover and what happens if it fails.
- Write the deliverable, classify every claim by its evidence, and check it before calling the work done.
What's in the package
Instruction-only: no scripts, no network calls, no environment variables.
- LICENSE.txt
- SKILL.md
- agents/openai.yaml
- assets/output-template-artifact.md
- assets/output-template-contract.md
- assets/output-template-decision.md
- assets/output-template-domain.md
- assets/output-template-fitness.md
- assets/output-template-mechanism.md
- references/domain-rules.md
- references/operating-rules.md
- references/output-contract.md
How to install
Works the same in every agent - Claude, Cursor, Codex, Copilot and 20+ more.
- 1
Download the ZIP
Free skills download straight away. Paid skills unlock right after purchase.
- 2
Unzip into your skills folder
Every agent reads skills from one folder on your machine. Drop the unzipped folder in there.
- 3
Ask your agent to use it
Restart the agent if it was already running. It picks the skill up automatically - no config needed.
Skills folder by agent
Click the path to copy it. Create the folder if it does not exist yet.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill passes our trust checks below.
Security scanned
Passed our 8-point scan before listing
Fresh listing
Recently published to Agensi
30-day refund
Not a fit? Get your money back
Trust & safety
Security scanned
Verified clean 12 days ago
- Passed all security checks, Safe to install