Launched this week
Arcovia
Architecture Intelligence for React & Next.js Projects
20 followers
Architecture Intelligence for React & Next.js Projects
20 followers
Arcovia goes beyond linting by analyzing the architecture of React and Next.js applications. It builds a dependency graph, evaluates deterministic architecture rules, calculates an explainable Architecture Health Score, and generates an interactive HTML report with hotspots, findings, maintenance burden, and actionable recommendations. Built for teams that want to understand, measure, and continuously improve their architecture.
Hey Product Hunt! 👋 I'm Ghazi, the maker of Arcovia.
Arcovia started as a weekend project for the OpenAI Build Week Hackathon. I began building it on Friday evening with one goal: create a tool that helps developers understand the architecture of their React and Next.js applications, not just their code quality.
Most tools tell you what is wrong. I wanted to answer why your architecture received a particular score and what you should fix first.
Arcovia performs deterministic analysis by parsing your project, building a dependency graph, and evaluating architecture rules to generate an interactive HTML report with:
✨ Architecture Health Score
📊 Dependency Graph
🎯 Hotspots & Actionable Findings
📈 Explainable Scoring & Maintenance Burden
One of my favorite parts of this project is how it was built. GPT-5.6 and Codex became my engineering collaborators, helping me iterate on the architecture, scoring engine, reports, and developer experience throughout the weekend. I also used ChatGPT Images to design the branding, owl mascot, logo, and launch assets.
Arcovia is 100% open source, and this is just the beginning. My vision is to make it an architecture intelligence platform that helps teams understand, measure, and continuously improve their codebases over time.
If you have a React or Next.js project, I'd love for you to give it a try. Your feedback on the architecture score, findings, and overall experience will help shape the roadmap.
Thank you for checking it out, and I'm happy to answer any questions! 🚀
Appreciate if you ⭐️ Github repo: https://github.com/gkhan205/arcovia
One thing that would make this even more useful for my team is the ability to compare architecture health scores across git branches or PRs so we can see if a change actually improved things or introduced new hotspots before merging.
@elanurg95829 That is actually next on my list. A GitHub Action that runs on PRs and comments with the score delta versus main, so you catch regressions before merging. Would that solve it for your team, or do you need something more persistent, like a dashboard tracking the score across all PRs over time?
Ran it on a pretty messy Next.js codebase and the dependency graph alone made it worth it, you can actually see where stuff is tangled. The health score is a nice touch too, feels honest instead of just nitpicking.
@meral25451 Really glad the dependency graph helped surface the tangled parts, that is exactly the use case I built it for. What kind of repo was it, monorepo, size roughly, App Router or Pages Router? Trying to build a test corpus of real messy codebases to sharpen the rules.
The dependency graph view is genuinely useful, spotted two circular imports our team had been chasing for weeks. Health Score feels concrete and explainable, not just a vague number.
@sevimb37927 That's exactly the kind of case I built this for. Circular imports are invisible until you're staring at a graph. Curious, once you spotted them, was it obvious how to break the cycle, or did the report help there too? Thinking about whether to add suggested fixes for common patterns like that.
Love that you're going beyond linting, the architecture health score concept is genuinely useful. One thing that would make this even better for my team is a way to set custom scoring weights per project, like letting us prioritize security hotspots over duplication for a healthcare app versus a marketing site.
@dceteli47457 That's a great point, security-critical vs marketing-site is a real difference in what should matter most. Right now the weights are fixed defaults based on general best practices. Configurable weighting per project is on my radar, curious how your team would want to define that, per-project config file, or something set once at the org level?
Honestly this sounds super useful for our Next.js app, we have been wrestling with messy dependency layers for a while. One thing that would really help is letting teams define custom architecture rules on top of the built-in ones, basically a config file where we can flag something like "no component under src/components should import from src/server". That way Arcovia fits whatever shape your codebase actually needs instead of only the defaults.
@hatunnevruz That's a pattern I keep hearing, several people have asked for exactly this kind of custom rule support. A config file for import boundaries, like blocking src/components from importing src/server, is very doable. Would you want just import-path rules, or also things like max coupling per module, file size limits, that kind of thing?
Ran it on a fairly messy Next.js codebase and the hotspots view immediately showed a couple of cycles we had been ignoring for months. The explainable health score is a nice touch too, makes it easy to share with the team without sounding preachy.
@zeynepakj0 That's a great way to put it, the score doing the arguing instead of you. Curious how big the team is and whether this is something you'd want running automatically on a schedule, or just something you pull up before specific conversations like retros.