migration-architect

migration-architect

Shape the rollout strategy for a migration before any DDL or code is written. Plans phases, dual-write windows, cutover sequencing, deprecation cycles, and cross-service coordination. Hands off to laravel-migration (or the framework-native equivalent) for tactical DDL once the plan is locked.

When to use

• A schema change spans more than one deploy.
• A change requires a dual-write or backfill window.
• The migration touches multiple services, queues, or consumers whose order of update matters.
• A column / table / API is being deprecated and the cycle needs shape (announce → soft-fail → hard-fail → remove).

Do NOT use when:

• The change is a single additive migration safe in one deploy → route to laravel-migration (or framework-native equivalent).
• The decision is whether to migrate at all → route to decision-record first.
• The concern is data correctness during the migration → route to data-flow-mapper and feed findings back here.

Procedure

1. Anchor on the goal

Write one sentence: "State X must become state Y across systems Z without breaking consumers W." If you cannot, the migration is not ripe — stop.

2. Identify the participating systems

List every service, queue, batch job, third-party consumer, and client that reads or writes the affected schema. A system you forget is a cutover surprise.

3. Pick a rollout shape

State why the shape fits — not just which one was picked.

4. Sequence the phases

For each phase, list:

• Trigger — what condition starts it.
• Actions — DDL, code deploy, feature flag, traffic shift.
• Reversibility — can we abort here, and how?
• Exit gate — what proves we can move to the next phase (metric, sign-off, soak time).

A phase without an exit gate is a wish; reject.

5. Plan the deprecation cycle

For anything being removed:

• Announce window — comms cadence, who is told.
• Soft-fail window — log + warn, do not break.
• Hard-fail window — return errors.
• Removal — DDL drop, code delete.

Each window has a duration and a metric that justifies moving on.

Output format

Migration Architect
Goal:     <one sentence>
Systems:  <list>
Shape:    expand-migrate-contract | dual-write | strangler | big-bang
Reason:   <why this shape>

Phases:
  1. <name>  Trigger: <cond>  Exit: <gate>  Reversible: yes | costly | no
       Actions: ...
  2. ...

Deprecation cycle (if any):
  Announce <duration>  →  soft-fail <duration>  →  hard-fail <duration>  →  remove

Next: /laravel-migration (or framework-native equivalent) for the DDL of phase 1

Gotcha

• The riskiest phase is the one with no rollback. Surface it explicitly even if the user did not ask.
• Soak times in hours when interest is in days are a smell. Match the soak to the actual blast radius.

Do NOT

• Do NOT write DDL — that is the framework-specific migration skill's job (→ laravel-migration for Laravel).
• Do NOT collapse phases to "ship it" because the user is impatient; surface the risk and let the user decide.
• Do NOT skip the deprecation cycle because nobody is using the old shape "for sure" — verify before skipping.