Skip to content
All Skills

Dotnet Design Pattern Review

Review the C#/.NET code for design pattern implementation and suggest improvements.

Software Engineering|v1|Updated 7/14/2026|GitHub source
MCP get_skill({ skillId: "net-c-design-pattern-review-c1a8345b" })

Use this skill with your agent

Create a free account and connect via MCP

Get Started Free
# .NET/C# Design Pattern Review

Review the C#/.NET code in ${selection} for design pattern implementation and suggest improvements for the solution/project. Do not make any changes to the code, just provide a review.

## Required Design Patterns

- **Command Pattern**: Generic base classes (`CommandHandler<TOptions>`), `ICommandHandler<TOptions>` interface, `CommandHandlerOptions` inheritance, static `SetupCommand(IHost host)` methods
- **Factory Pattern**: Complex object creation service provider integration
- **Dependency Injection**: Primary constructor syntax, `ArgumentNullException` null checks, interface abstractions, proper service lifetimes
- **Repository Pattern**: Async data access interfaces provider abstractions for connections
- **Provider Pattern**: External service abstractions (database, AI), clear contracts, configuration handling
- **Resource Pattern**: ResourceManager for localized messages, separate .resx files (LogMessages, ErrorMessages)

## Review Checklist

- **Design Patterns**: Identify patterns used. Are Command Handler, Factory, Provider, and Repository patterns correctly implemented? Missing beneficial patterns?
- **Architecture**: Follow namespace conventions (`{Core|Console|App|Service}.{Feature}`)? Proper separation between Core/Console projects? Modular and readable?
- **.NET Best Practices**: Primary constructors, async/await with Task returns, ResourceManager usage, structured logging, strongly-typed configuration?
- **GoF Patterns**: Command, Factory, Template Method, Strategy patterns correctly implemented?
- **SOLID Principles**: Single Responsibility, Open/Closed, Liskov Substitution, Interface Segregation, Dependency Inversion violations?
- **Performance**: Proper async/await, resource disposal, ConfigureAwait(false), parallel processing opportunities?
- **Maintainability**: Clear separation of concerns, consistent error handling, proper configuration usage?
- **Testability**: Dependencies abstracted via interfaces, mockable components, async testability, AAA pattern compatibility?
- **Security**: Input validation, secure credential handling, parameterized queries, safe exception handling?
- **Documentation**: XML docs for public APIs, parameter/return descriptions, resource file organization?
- **Code Clarity**: Meaningful names reflecting domain concepts, clear intent through patterns, self-explanatory structure?
- **Clean Code**: Consistent style, appropriate method/class size, minimal complexity, eliminated duplication?

## Improvement Focus Areas

- **Command Handlers**: Validation in base class, consistent error handling, proper resource management
- **Factories**: Dependency configuration, service provider integration, disposal patterns
- **Providers**: Connection management, async patterns, exception handling and logging
- **Configuration**: Data annotations, validation attributes, secure sensitive value handling
- **AI/ML Integration**: Semantic Kernel patterns, structured output handling, model configuration

Provide specific, actionable recommendations for improvements aligned with the project's architecture and .NET best practices.
#github-copilot#architecture

Related Skills

More skills in Software Engineering

Accessibility Standards

Comprehensive web accessibility standards based on WCAG 2.2 AA, with 38+ anti-patterns, legal enforcement context (EAA, ADA Title II), WAI-ARIA patterns, and framework-specific fixes for modern web frameworks and libraries.

#github-copilot#accessibilityMIT

Accord

Authoring unified specification packages across Business/Development/Design teams via staged elaboration (L0 Vision → L1 Requirements → L2 Team Detail → L3 Acceptance Criteria). No code. Use when authoring cross-team specs, building L0-L3 packages, or aligning Biz/Dev/Design on a single source of truth.

#broad-capability#developmentMIT

Acquire Codebase Knowledge

Use this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.

#github-copilot#documentationMIT

Acreadiness Assess

Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc readiness` and hands off rendering to the @ai-readiness-reporter custom agent. Supports policies (--policy) for org-specific scoring. Use when asked to assess, audit, or score the AI readiness of a repo.

#github-copilot#planningMIT

Acreadiness Generate Instructions

Generate tailored AI agent instruction files via AgentRC instructions command. Produces .github/copilot-instructions.md (default, recommended for Copilot in VS Code) plus optional per-area .instructions.md files with applyTo globs for monorepos. Use after running /acreadiness-assess to close gaps in the AI Tooling pillar.

#github-copilot#skillMIT

Acreadiness Policy

Help the user pick, write, or apply an AgentRC policy. Policies customise readiness scoring by disabling irrelevant checks, overriding impact/level, setting pass-rate thresholds, or chaining org baselines with team overrides. Use when the user asks about strict mode, AI-only scoring, custom weights, CI gating, or wants org-wide standardisation.

#github-copilot#planningMIT