Draw.io Diagram Forge
Generate draw.io editable diagrams using AI-powered workflow.
When to Use
- Creating architecture diagrams (Azure, AWS)
- Converting flowcharts from text descriptions
- Transforming images/screenshots into editable format
- Generating swimlane, sequence diagrams
- Editing Azure/AWS icons in existing .drawio files
Choose this skill when the result will need later GUI editing in draw.io, cloud icons, or documentation-facing diagram assets.
When NOT to Use
- Quick inline diagrams that are easier to keep as Mermaid in README or Markdown
- One-off text-native diagrams where manual GUI adjustment is not expected
- Charts or infographics that require exact axes, data binding, typography, or scripted regeneration
- Large multilingual label sets whose font rendering must be identical across platforms
Prerequisites
| Tool | Required |
|---|---|
| VS Code | Yes |
| Draw.io Integration | Yes |
| GitHub Copilot | Yes |
Quick Start
Create a login flow diagram
Generate an Azure Hub-Spoke architecture diagram
From inputs/requirements.md, create a system diagram
Output Formats
| Extension | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
*.drawio | Native format | Recommended |
*.drawio.svg | SVG + metadata | Markdown/Web |
*.drawio.png | PNG + metadata | Image with edit |
Output: outputs/
If the user asks for an editable diagram, make *.drawio the primary deliverable. Do not let a plain SVG or preview artifact become the file the user is expected to edit.
Recommended Delivery Pattern
ドキュメント向けは name.drawio (editable) + name.drawio.svg (embed) を対で出す。多言語変体・Qiita への掲載・ローカル preview 脱出手順は → references/delivery-patterns.md。
Workflow
USER INPUT → ORCHESTRATOR → MANIFEST GATEWAY → SVG FORGE → COMPLETED
Quality Gates
| Score | Action |
|---|---|
| 90-100 | Proceed |
| 70-84 | Fix and retry |
| 50-69 | Simplify |
| 0-29 | Ask user |
When the deliverable is headed for print, gate it on the Monochrome Print Profile and the Pre-delivery Geometry Sweep in style-guide.md before any visual review.
Limits
| Limit | Value |
|---|---|
| Manifest revision | 2 |
| SVG revision | 2 |
| Total timeout | 45min |
Cloud Icons
Use Cloud Icons Reference. Azure diagrams must use verified img/lib/azure2/**/*.svg image paths, retain short service labels, and fall back to neutral boxes only when an icon is missing or misleading.
References
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| mxcell-structure.md | mxCell XML structure |
| cloud-icons.md | Azure/AWS icon guide |
| style-guide.md | Node colors, edge styles |
| delivery-patterns.md | Editable + embed pair, Qiita, multilingual |
| troubleshooting.md | Full troubleshooting (21 items) |
Scripts
| Script | Description |
|---|---|
scripts/validate_drawio.py | Validate mxCell structure |
Troubleshooting
頻度高トップ 4 件を下記に掲載。全一覧（フレーム/エッジ/余白/PDF 出力、レジェンド位置、エスケープ層、CLI の export オプション 等 24 項目）は references/troubleshooting.md。
| Issue | Solution |
|---|---|
| Blank in draw.io | Check content attribute |
| Edges not visible | Verify node IDs |
| Icons missing | Enable Azure/AWS shapes (+ More Shapes → Azure / AWS) |
| Text overlaps near outer frame | Inset top callout 16–24px, increase height, wrap to 3–4 lines; review at actual embed width |
Done Criteria
-
.drawioor.drawio.svgfile generated - Diagram opens correctly in VS Code Draw.io extension
- If an editable
.drawio.svgis part of the delivery, it was exported with--embed-diagramand containsmxfile - All nodes and edges visible
- User-facing links point to the editable
.drawiowhen editability is expected - Decision flows avoid long return/merge lines that bundle branch outputs back into one sink
- Quality gate score ≥ 85
- If diagram is referenced from documentation, both editable source and embeddable image are provided
- Render review completed at the target embed width: no text overlap, clipping, or border collisions, no edges overlapping on one line, no edge endpoint buried inside a filled box, no label riding on a box or another label, no node outside the page
- After any edge or label layout change, re-export the delivery asset for the target medium (SVG for web, PNG or the final PDF for print) and inspect it; structural validation alone does not prove visual routing quality