Pmstudio Arb Skill for Claude

ARB Review — Architecture Review Board Presentation

Purpose

Generates an 11-slide architecture review presentation following Coco Inc's standard ARB format. Used when a product needs architecture sign-off for a new instance, major integration, platform migration, or periodic review.

Process

Step 1: Read Context

Required sources (read all that exist):

• CLAUDE.local.md — project context, architecture decisions, stakeholders, ProdID
• PRD/*.html or PRD/*.md — requirements, NFRs, technical considerations, integrations, data model
• Architecture/ or *Architecture*.html — existing diagrams, maps

Optional sources:

• .sync-watch.json — project name
• Operational/DR-Plan*.html — RTO/RPO targets (for slide 8)
• Data/Stakeholder-Directory.* — presenter and audience names

Step 2: Ask Discovery Questions

Only ask what cannot be inferred from context:

• Review type? New Product / Major Change / Periodic Review / Decommission
• Data classification? Purple / Red / Yellow / Green (if not in PRD)
• Audience? Firm-level ARB / Department-level / Technical review
• Known constraints or mandates? (e.g., "must use existing Snowflake instance")
• Decision you need? Approve / Approve-with-conditions / Defer — what specifically?

Step 3: Generate 11-Slide Deck

Output: Presentations/ARB-Review-{ProductName}-{Date}.html

Self-contained HTML file with:

• System fonts (no CDN dependencies)
• Click/keyboard navigation between slides
• Print CSS for PDF export
• Mermaid.js (CDN) for architecture diagrams

Slide structure — see references/arb-format.md for section details:

| # | Slide | Key Content |

|---|-------|-------------|

| 1 | Title & Context | Product name, ProdID, review type, date, presenters |

| 2 | Business Context | Problem statement, strategic alignment, sponsor |

| 3 | Current State | AS-IS architecture (Mermaid diagram), pain points |

| 4 | Proposed Architecture | TO-BE architecture (Mermaid diagram), what changes |

| 5 | Data Architecture | Data classification, flows, retention, residency |

| 6 | Security & Access | AuthN/AuthZ, RBAC, encryption, CUECs |

| 7 | Integration Points | Upstream/downstream, protocols, error handling |

| 8 | NFRs & SLAs | Performance, availability, RTO/RPO, scalability |

| 9 | Risk Assessment | Architecture risks, mitigations, residual acceptance |

| 10 | Implementation Plan | Phases, timeline, rollback, blast radius |

| 11 | Decision Request | What you need from the board, options, recommendation |

Step 4: Populate Content

For each slide, pull from project sources:

• Slide 1: Product name and ProdID from CLAUDE.local.md. Review type from Step 2. Presenters from stakeholder directory.
• Slides 3-4: Generate Mermaid diagrams from PRD architecture section and Architecture maps. If current-state diagram exists, use it. If not, build from PRD integrations and technical considerations.
• Slide 5: Data classification from PRD or discovery. Data flows from integrations section. Retention from NFRs.
• Slide 6: RBAC from PRD. CUECs from operationalization section. SSO/AuthN from technical considerations.
• Slide 7: Extract all integration points from PRD. Add protocol, frequency, error handling.
• Slide 8: Pull NFRs directly from PRD table. RTO/RPO from DR plan if it exists.
• Slide 9: Pull risks from PRD risk section. Add architecture-specific risks.
• Slide 10: Pull timeline from PRD. Add rollback strategy.
• Slide 11: Decision request from Step 2. Frame options with recommendation.

Step 5: Present for Review

Show the deck outline with key content per slide. Ask:

• "Does this cover the right scope?"
• "Any slides that need different emphasis?"
• "Who are the presenters for slide 1?"

Apply feedback, then write the file.

Critical Rules

• Mermaid diagrams are mandatory for slides 3 and 4. Architecture reviews without diagrams fail.
• Data classification must be explicit. If unknown, mark as "TBD — requires classification" in red. Never assume.
• Slide 11 must have a clear ask. Not "please review" but "approve this architecture for production deployment" or "approve with condition: validate cascading before Phase 2."
• No implementation details on architecture slides. Show components, interfaces, and data flows — not code, configs, or step-by-step procedures.
• Keep it to 11 slides. If more content is needed, add appendix slides clearly labeled "APPENDIX" after slide 11.