Decision architecture Five gates before a build expands. A platform can be swapped. The workflow contract, validation model, and handoff discipline cannot be faked.
Platform agnostic architecture decision flow 01 Target flow 02 Cloud service 03 CAD runtime 04 Validation, gates, 05 SDLC and Target flow Name the operating path before choosing tooling. The map shows actors, files, approvals, outputs, exception owners, and the first boundary that can be proven. The team can point to the workflow start, finish, owner, handoff, and stop condition without private files leaving the right channel. Cloud service map Keep hosted services subordinate to the workflow contract. Storage, identity, queues, APIs, documents, reporting, and support paths are placed around the business handoff instead of a vendor diagram. Each service has a reason to exist, a data owner, a failure mode, and a rollback or manual fallback. CAD runtime decision Choose desktop, plugin, script, batch, or external service by runtime risk. The decision separates user-driven commands, background generation, model access, drawing output, deployment, licensing, and support ownership. The selected runtime can be validated against accepted examples before it touches adjacent workflows. Validation, gates, and confidence Treat validation as the buying decision, not a late QA chore. Expected outputs, field checks, naming rules, lifecycle states, exception examples, and reviewer signoff are defined before expansion. A buyer can approve, narrow, pause, or stop with evidence the technical team accepts. SDLC and observability Leave a supportable system, not just a working demo. Source control, environments, release notes, logging, error states, ownership, and handoff artifacts are sized to the engagement. The team can see what changed, who owns it, how it fails, and what to inspect next. 