2nd/10_Wiki/Topics/Architecture/Conceptual Integrity.md

---
id: wiki-2026-0508-conceptual-integrity
title: Conceptual Integrity
category: 10_Wiki/Topics
status: verified
canonical_id: self
aliases: [Architectural Integrity, Brooks Conceptual Integrity]
duplicate_of: none
source_trust_level: A
confidence_score: 0.9
verification_status: applied
tags: [architecture, design, brooks, mythical-man-month]
raw_sources: []
last_reinforced: 2026-05-10
github_commit: pending
tech_stack:
  language: agnostic
  framework: agnostic
---

# Conceptual Integrity

## 매 한 줄
> **"매 system design 의 the most important consideration — 매 unified set of design ideas, 매 single mind 의 product."**. Brooks 의 *Mythical Man-Month* (1975) 의 central thesis. 매 great system 은 매 small group of architects 의 vision. 2026년 design systems, API design, programming language design, framework architecture 에 핵심 원칙으로 산다.

## 매 핵심

### 매 Brooks 의 정의
> "Conceptual integrity is the most important consideration in system design. It is better to have a system omit certain anomalous features and improvements, but to reflect one set of design ideas, than to have one that contains many good but independent and uncoordinated ideas."

### 매 implications
- **Architect/designer** 의 separation from implementation team.
- **Say no** to features that violate the model.
- **Programmer's manual** = single source of truth.
- **Small architect group** > committee — 매 "design by committee" 의 X.

### 매 modern manifestations
- **API design**: consistent verbs, naming, error model (Stripe, GitHub APIs).
- **Programming languages**: Go's "less is more", Rust's ownership model.
- **Frameworks**: Rails "convention over configuration", Django "batteries included with one way".
- **Design systems**: single token vocabulary, predictable behaviors.

### 매 Tension
- Conceptual integrity vs feature completeness.
- Single architect vs distributed teams.
- Stability vs evolution.

### 매 응용
1. API design (REST resource model 의 일관성).
2. Language design (Go, Elm).
3. UI framework (SwiftUI, Jetpack Compose).
4. CLI design (git, kubectl).

## 💻 패턴

### Consistent API model (Stripe-style)
```typescript
// Every resource follows: list, retrieve, create, update, delete
GET    /v1/customers           // list
GET    /v1/customers/:id       // retrieve
POST   /v1/customers           // create
POST   /v1/customers/:id       // update (Stripe uses POST not PUT)
DELETE /v1/customers/:id       // delete

// Same shape for charges, subscriptions, invoices, ...
```

### Consistent error model
```typescript
// Every error response follows the same shape
type ApiError = {
  error: {
    type: 'invalid_request' | 'authentication' | 'rate_limit' | 'server';
    code: string;
    message: string;
    param?: string;
    request_id: string;
  };
};
```

### Convention over configuration (Rails-like)
```ruby
# Filename, class name, table name, route — all derived by convention
# app/models/article.rb       → Article class → articles table
# app/controllers/articles_controller.rb → /articles routes
class Article < ApplicationRecord
  # No XML config needed
end
```

### Single mental model — Go's error handling
```go
// One pattern for errors, used everywhere
result, err := doThing()
if err != nil {
    return nil, fmt.Errorf("doThing failed: %w", err)
}
// No exceptions, no Result<T,E>, just (T, error)
```

### Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) preserve integrity
```markdown
# ADR-007: All write APIs return the full resource

## Status
Accepted

## Context
Mixing return shapes (id-only vs full object) violates conceptual integrity.

## Decision
All POST/PUT/PATCH endpoints return the full updated resource.

## Consequences
- Slightly larger response bodies.
- Clients never need a follow-up GET after write.
```

### "Say no" guard — RFC review
```markdown
## Proposal
Add a special-case `/users/me/notifications/digest` that returns
HTML instead of JSON.

## Reviewer
Rejected. All API endpoints return JSON. Render HTML in client
or build a separate `/email-templates/*` namespace.
```

## 매 결정 기준
| 상황 | Approach |
|---|---|
| Public API design | Strict consistency, single architect, "no" gate |
| Internal tooling | Conventions documented, ADRs |
| Framework | One canonical way per task |
| Multi-team product | Style guide + design system + design council |
| Research/exploration | Looser — ideas before integrity |

**기본값**: Small architect council (2-4 people), written design principles, ADRs, explicit "rejected" log.

## 🔗 Graph
- 부모: [[Software Architecture]]
- 변형: [[Design Principles]]
- 응용: [[API Design]] · [[Design Systems]] · [[ADR]]

## 🤖 LLM 활용
**언제**: API design review, framework architecture, design system kickoff, language design, contested feature decisions.
**언제 X**: 1-week prototype, research spike, throwaway script.

## ❌ 안티패턴
- **Design by committee**: 모두가 한 마디씩 — 매 disjoint feature soup.
- **Feature creep without rejection**: 매 yes — 매 integrity 의 erosion.
- **Multiple ways to do same thing**: Python's "one obvious way" violation — choice paralysis.
- **No written principles**: implicit consensus — 매 architect 떠나면 깨짐.

## 🧪 검증 / 중복
- Verified (Brooks "Mythical Man-Month" 1975/1995 anniversary ed. / Stripe API design / Go FAQ).
- 신뢰도 A.

## 🕓 Changelog
| 날짜 | 변경 |
|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | Phase 1 |
| 2026-05-10 | Manual cleanup — Brooks definition + modern API/framework 적용 |