
Design An Interface
- 2 installs
- Updated May 12, 2026
- vinvcn/mattpocock-skills
This is a copy of design-an-interface by mattpocock - installs and ranking accrue to the original listing.
Helps with ai & agent building tasks during AI-assisted development.
About
design-an-interface is a Claude Code skill for ai & agent building. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted coding.
- design-an-interface
- AI & Agent Building
- AI-coding skill
Design An Interface by the numbers
- 2 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Data as of Jul 27, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/vinvcn/mattpocock-skills --skill design-an-interfaceAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 2 |
|---|---|
| Last updated | May 12, 2026 |
| Repository | vinvcn/mattpocock-skills ↗ |
What it does
Helps with ai & agent building tasks during AI-assisted development.
Files
Design an Interface
Based on "Design It Twice" from "A Philosophy of Software Design": your first idea is unlikely to be the best. Generate multiple radically different designs, then compare.
Workflow
1. Gather Requirements
Before designing, understand:
- [ ] What problem does this module solve?
- [ ] Who are the callers? (other modules, external users, tests)
- [ ] What are the key operations?
- [ ] Any constraints? (performance, compatibility, existing patterns)
- [ ] What should be hidden inside vs exposed?
Ask: "What does this module need to do? Who will use it?"
2. Generate Designs (Parallel Sub-Agents)
Spawn 3+ sub-agents simultaneously using Task tool. Each must produce a radically different approach.
Prompt template for each sub-agent:
Design an interface for: [module description]
Requirements: [gathered requirements]
Constraints for this design: [assign a different constraint to each agent]
- Agent 1: "Minimize method count - aim for 1-3 methods max"
- Agent 2: "Maximize flexibility - support many use cases"
- Agent 3: "Optimize for the most common case"
- Agent 4: "Take inspiration from [specific paradigm/library]"
Output format:
1. Interface signature (types/methods)
2. Usage example (how caller uses it)
3. What this design hides internally
4. Trade-offs of this approach3. Present Designs
Show each design with:
1. Interface signature - types, methods, params 2. Usage examples - how callers actually use it in practice 3. What it hides - complexity kept internal
Present designs sequentially so user can absorb each approach before comparison.
4. Compare Designs
After showing all designs, compare them on:
- Interface simplicity: fewer methods, simpler params
- General-purpose vs specialized: flexibility vs focus
- Implementation efficiency: does shape allow efficient internals?
- Depth: small interface hiding significant complexity (good) vs large interface with thin implementation (bad)
- Ease of correct use vs ease of misuse
Discuss trade-offs in prose, not tables. Highlight where designs diverge most.
5. Synthesize
Often the best design combines insights from multiple options. Ask:
- "Which design best fits your primary use case?"
- "Any elements from other designs worth incorporating?"
Evaluation Criteria
From "A Philosophy of Software Design":
Interface simplicity: Fewer methods, simpler params = easier to learn and use correctly.
General-purpose: Can handle future use cases without changes. But beware over-generalization.
Implementation efficiency: Does interface shape allow efficient implementation? Or force awkward internals?
Depth: Small interface hiding significant complexity = deep module (good). Large interface with thin implementation = shallow module (avoid).
Anti-Patterns
- Don't let sub-agents produce similar designs - enforce radical difference
- Don't skip comparison - the value is in contrast
- Don't implement - this is purely about interface shape
- Don't evaluate based on implementation effort