linksofteu/ddd-application-slice

Purpose

Use this skill to design or implement one coherent DDD application slice in a standardized structure:

• entrypoint (controller, endpoint, or application service)
• mediator-style message (query, command, or event/fire-and-forget message)
• handler
• optional domain service
• repository and mapping

Keep the skill technology-agnostic. The mediator library can vary. Preserve the architectural responsibilities.

Core model

Treat each new use case as one of these three flows:

1. Query for data

   • use a request/response read model such as a query + query handler
   • keep it side-effect free
   • usually inject repository directly in the handler and map/return the result

2. Trigger a change and wait for a result

   • use a command-style request handled synchronously from the caller's perspective
   • return only the data the caller actually needs
   • for simple changes, handler-to-repository is acceptable
   • for business rules, orchestration, invariants, or multi-entity logic, call a domain service that uses repositories

3. Trigger a change and do not wait for a result

   • use an event, notification, local message, queued command, or equivalent fire-and-forget concept from the chosen stack
   • use this for follow-up work, integration reactions, notifications, cache invalidation, workflows, or other side effects that should not shape the immediate response contract

Workflow

1. Identify the entrypoint

Start from the caller-facing surface:

• controller
• HTTP endpoint
• application service
• background entrypoint

Keep the entrypoint thin.

It should mainly:

• accept input
• enforce coarse authorization or transport concerns if needed
• create the mediator message
• dispatch it
• return the result

Do not place business rules or repository orchestration in the entrypoint unless the existing project convention explicitly requires it.

2. Choose the message type before writing code

Ask:

• Is this only reading data? Use a query.
• Is this changing state and the caller needs completion or returned data? Use a command.
• Is this changing state or reacting to a change without the caller waiting for completion? Use an event or other fire-and-forget message.

If a single request both mutates state and kicks off secondary reactions, split the responsibilities:

• command handles the primary state change
• event or fire-and-forget message handles follow-up reactions

3. Design the handler responsibilities

Handlers should coordinate one use case, not become a dumping ground.

Default handler responsibilities:

• load required data
• perform simple guard checks that are specific to the use case
• map transport DTOs to domain/application models where needed
• delegate business logic to the right place
• persist through repositories, directly or via domain service
• map the result to the response type
• publish follow-up events when appropriate

4. Decide between direct repository usage and domain service

Use this default decision rule:

Use repository directly from the handler when the action is simple, localized, and has little business logic.

Examples:

• straightforward lookup
• simple create, update, or delete
• toggling or saving user preferences
• fetching and mapping data for a query

Use a domain service when the use case includes meaningful business behavior.

Typical signals:

• invariants or business rules
• multiple validation steps
• multiple entities or aggregates involved
• workflow or stage transitions
• derived values or generated identifiers
• repeated logic likely to be reused
• domain events or follow-up reactions tied to domain behavior

The preferred chain for complex writes is:

entrypoint -> mediator message -> handler -> domain service -> repository

5. Shape the output deliberately

For queries:

• return DTOs or read models
• optimize for read concerns and mapping clarity
• do not return domain entities directly unless the project standard explicitly does so

For commands:

• return nothing when the caller only needs success/failure
• return a DTO, identifier, or summary only when the caller truly needs it

For fire-and-forget messages:

• avoid response coupling
• treat the contract as a trigger, not a conversational API

6. Keep business logic out of the wrong layers

Avoid these common mistakes:

• controller or app service contains repository logic
• query handler performs writes
• command handler accumulates deep domain logic that belongs in a domain service
• domain service depends on transport-specific concerns
• event handler becomes the primary write path for synchronous user workflows

7. Validate the slice before finishing

Check that:

• the entrypoint is thin
• the message type matches the intent
• reads stay separate from writes
• complex business rules live in a domain service
• repositories handle persistence, not application orchestration
• fire-and-forget work is separated from the immediate response path
• naming reflects intent clearly (Get...Query, Create...Command, ...Event, ...Handler or equivalent project naming)

Defaults

• Prefer thin entrypoints and focused handlers.
• Prefer queries for reads, commands for awaited writes, and events or equivalent messages for non-awaited follow-up work.
• For queries, repository + mapping in the handler is usually enough.
• For simple commands, handler + repository is acceptable.
• For complex commands, route through a domain service.
• Keep the guidance abstract enough to fit MediatR-style libraries, Wolverine-style handlers, ABP local message bus patterns, or similar mediator architectures.

Reference

• Read references/slice-planning-checklist.md when you need a more explicit planning sequence, a responsibility matrix, or a concrete implementation checklist for a new slice.