Read your architecture map
Follow entities and relationships into their evidence, confidence, and coverage in the workspace.
The map is a view of a selected review's architectural model. Begin with one question, such as “What can reach this API?” or “Which application reads this database?”
Select the review you mean
Open Architecture → Map and choose a completed review. Read the source label and date before comparing its result with another system or environment. The review selector may offer partial results; their collection limits remain relevant even if the diagram looks complete.
Map and Truth links keep the selected review in the URL, so a teammate with workspace access can open the same context. The illustration on the public homepage is separate from workspace evidence.
Follow a relationship
- Select an entity in the map. Use search or the layer filter when the system is large.
- Read the entity's type and source information in the inspector.
- Open a connection under How this entity connects. The direction matters: “API reads database” makes a different claim from “database reaches API.”
- Read the relationship's recorded confidence and evidence references.
- Select Open evidence & confidence to continue into Truth.
You can explore 3D depth with the camera controls, drag the background in Rotate view mode, or use 2D. When Rotate view is focused, arrow keys adjust the camera and Home resets it. Pause diagram animation stops automatic movement. Reduced-motion preferences disable automatic camera movement.
The D2 export represents the current graph. Layout and animation do not add evidence or indicate live network traffic.
Follow the relationship.
A public route reaches the API directly.
Entities are the things. Relationships explain the system.
Select an entity to read what connects to it. An arrow has a direction and a meaning; it is more than a line between two boxes.
The service handles application requests and reads from the database. Authentication is delegated to the gateway by a human decision.
- Evidence
- server/database.py:24 · database client
- Recorded confidence
- 96% · code reference and connection configuration agree
Ask why a relationship is believed.
The same claim can have several supporting observations. Inspect the source, location, collection time, and any disagreement before relying on it.
- Code · declared application behavior
server/database.py:24 establishes the database client. infra/ingress.tf:16 declares a direct API route.
- Cloud · observed configuration
An ingress inventory collected on 22 September 2026 corroborates the public API route. This is configuration evidence, not a packet trace.
- CI/CD · delivery context
.gitlab-ci.yml:28 names the deployment target. A pipeline definition alone does not prove a successful production deployment.
People provide intent. Hyperoru preserves it.
“The API delegates authentication” is context. The decision to accept that design, its rationale, and the condition that makes it acceptable must come from a person.
- Named owner
- Maya Chen · fictional platform lead
- Rationale and trade-off
- Avoid duplicate authentication work and reduce request latency; accept dependence on the gateway boundary.
- Required guardrail
- Every external request must pass through the authenticating gateway.
The author and approval are supplied example data. No code observation can establish that Maya made this decision.
A change needs a baseline, current evidence, and a question.
The question here is whether a later public route bypasses the gateway boundary required by the human decision.
The new IaC route and cloud observation support a boundary change. Review that evidence against the ratified decision before choosing an action.
Make what is unknown as visible as what is known.
Coverage describes the evidence available for a particular review. It is separate from confidence in any one relationship.
All three expected source families are present in this example. That does not establish complete cloud-account coverage or runtime behavior. IaC is configuration evidence and remains distinct from a live cloud observation.
Inspect the five parts of a claim
| Record | Plain-language meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Entity | A thing in the system. | An application API or database. |
| Relationship | A directed statement connecting things. | The API reads from the database. |
| Evidence | The observation supporting that statement. | A database client reference in a particular file. |
| Confidence | The recorded strength of the claim. | A score accompanied by source observations and any contradictions. |
| Coverage | The boundary of what the review could observe. | Code was collected; cloud configuration was not. |
Confidence in one relationship does not establish complete system coverage. A well-supported code relationship can coexist with missing cloud evidence.
Treat disagreement as information
If two sources disagree, inspect both observations and their dates. Configuration may have changed, collection may be partial, or the sources may describe different environments. A contradiction requires review; it should not disappear behind a smooth diagram.
Move from context to intent
The map can establish that an API delegates authentication. It cannot establish why a person accepted that design. Use Intent to capture the decision and its guardrails, then Drift to inspect later changes.