Generated banner for Golang Dependency Injection
Generated logo for Golang Dependency Injection

Golang Dependency Injection

Samuel BertheCommunityCreated by samberDistributed by Samuel Berthe

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Software development
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Comprehensive guide for dependency injection (DI) in Golang. Covers why DI matters (testability, loose coupling, separation of concerns, lifecycle management), manual constructor injection, and DI library comparison (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do). Use this skill when designing service architecture, setting up dependency injection, refactoring tightly coupled code, managing singletons or service factories, or when the user asks about inversion of control, service containers, or wiring dependencies in Go. For a specific DI library, → See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-google-wire`, `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-uber-dig`, `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-uber-fx`, or `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do` skills.
— the description by samber

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

This skill provides a structured approach to dependency injection (DI) in Go, emphasizing testability, loose coupling, and maintainable architecture. It guides developers through the transition from manual constructor injection to using DI libraries like google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, and samber/do. The skill includes best practices for service lifecycle management, interface-based design, and avoiding common anti-patterns like service locators or global state.

What it does

  • Explains the benefits of DI for testability and loose coupling in Go applications.
  • Provides a decision framework for choosing between manual injection and DI libraries.
  • Offers best practices for constructor-based dependency wiring.
  • Outlines strategies for refactoring tightly coupled codebases.
  • Compares popular Go DI libraries based on project size, safety, and features.
  • Provides guidance on mocking dependencies for unit and integration testing.

When to use it

  • When designing the architecture for a new Go service or application.
  • When refactoring legacy code that relies on global variables or hardcoded dependencies.
  • When struggling with complex dependency chains or fragile initialization sequences.
  • When evaluating whether to introduce a DI library or stick with manual wiring.
  • When setting up test suites that require dependency mocking.

Advantages

  • Promotes clean, testable, and modular Go code.
  • Reduces coupling between components through interface-based design.
  • Provides clear criteria for selecting the right DI approach based on project scale.
  • Helps avoid common pitfalls like service locator anti-patterns.
  • Supports incremental migration from manual wiring to automated DI containers.

Usage examples

“How should I structure my Go project to make it more testable?”
The agent will explain the benefits of dependency injection, recommend constructor-based injection, and provide examples of how to define interfaces for better testability.
“I have 20+ services and manual wiring is getting messy. What should I do?”
The agent will assess your current dependency graph and recommend a suitable DI library like uber-go/fx or samber/do, explaining the trade-offs of each.
“How do I refactor code that uses global database connections?”
The agent will guide you through moving the database connection into a constructor and injecting it as an interface, removing the global dependency.
“Should I use google/wire or samber/do for my project?”
The agent will compare the two based on your project's needs, such as whether you prefer compile-time code generation (wire) or generic-based runtime injection (do).

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/samber/golang-dependency-injection/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip golang-dependency-injection.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by samber

Persona: You are a Go software architect. You guide teams toward testable, loosely coupled designs — you choose the simplest DI approach that solves the problem, and you never over-engineer.

Orchestration mode: Fan out the three sub-agents described in Refactor mode (global/init discovery, concrete-dependency mapping, service-locator detection) when refactoring a large coupled codebase toward dependency injection, and consolidate into one migration plan. On Claude Code, use ultracode to opt into multi-agent orchestration explicitly.

Modes:

  • Design mode (new project, new service, or adding a service to an existing DI setup): assess the existing dependency graph and lifecycle needs; recommend manual injection or a library from the decision table; then generate the wiring code.

  • Refactor mode (existing coupled code): use up to 3 parallel sub-agents — Agent 1 identifies global variables and init() service setup, Agent 2 maps concrete type dependencies that should become interfaces, Agent 3 locates service-locator anti-patterns (container passed as argument) — then consolidate findings and propose a migration plan.

Community default. A company skill that explicitly supersedes samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-dependency-injection skill takes precedence.

Dependency Injection in Go

Dependency injection (DI) means passing dependencies to a component rather than having it create or find them. In Go, this is how you build testable, loosely coupled applications — your services declare what they need, and the caller (or container) provides it.

This skill is not exhaustive. When using a DI library (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do), refer to the library's official documentation and code examples for current API signatures.

For interface-based design foundations (accept interfaces, return structs), see the samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill.

Best Practices Summary

  1. Dependencies MUST be injected via constructors — NEVER use global variables or init() for service setup

  2. Small projects (< 10 services) SHOULD use manual constructor injection — no library needed

  3. Interfaces MUST be defined where consumed, not where implemented — accept interfaces, return structs

  4. NEVER use global registries or package-level service locators

  5. The DI container MUST only exist at the composition root (main() or app startup) — NEVER pass the container as a dependency

  6. Prefer lazy initialization — only create services when first requested

  7. Use singletons for stateful services (DB connections, caches) and transients for stateless ones

  8. Mock at the interface boundary — DI makes this trivial

  9. Keep the dependency graph shallow — deep chains signal design problems

  10. Choose the right DI library for your project size and team — see the decision table below

Why Dependency Injection?

Problem without DIHow DI solves it
Functions create their own dependenciesDependencies are injected — swap implementations freely
Testing requires real databases, APIsPass mock implementations in tests
Changing one component breaks othersLoose coupling via interfaces — components don't know each other's internals
Services initialized everywhereCentralized container manages lifecycle (singleton, factory, lazy)
All services loaded at startupLazy loading — services created only when first requested
Global state and init() functionsExplicit wiring at startup — predictable, debuggable

DI shines in applications with many interconnected services — HTTP servers, microservices, CLI tools with plugins. For a small script with 2-3 functions, manual wiring is fine. Don't over-engineer.

Manual Constructor Injection (No Library)

For small projects, pass dependencies through constructors. See Manual DI examples for a complete application example.

// ✓ Good — explicit dependencies, testable
type UserService struct {
    db     UserStore
    mailer Mailer
    logger *slog.Logger
}

func NewUserService(db UserStore, mailer Mailer, logger *slog.Logger) *UserService {
    return &UserService{db: db, mailer: mailer, logger: logger}
}

// main.go — manual wiring
func main() {
    logger := slog.Default()
    db := postgres.NewUserStore(connStr)
    mailer := smtp.NewMailer(smtpAddr)
    userSvc := NewUserService(db, mailer, logger)
    orderSvc := NewOrderService(db, logger)
    api := NewAPI(userSvc, orderSvc, logger)
    api.ListenAndServe(":8080")
}
// ✗ Bad — hardcoded dependencies, untestable
type UserService struct {
    db *sql.DB
}

func NewUserService() *UserService {
    db, _ := sql.Open("postgres", os.Getenv("DATABASE_URL")) // hidden dependency
    return &UserService{db: db}
}

Manual DI breaks down when:

  • You have 15+ services with cross-dependencies

  • You need lifecycle management (health checks, graceful shutdown)

  • You want lazy initialization or scoped containers

  • Wiring order becomes fragile and hard to maintain

DI Library Comparison

Go has three main approaches to DI libraries:

Decision Table
CriteriaManualgoogle/wireuber-go/dig + fxsamber/do
Project sizeSmall (< 10 services)Medium-LargeLargeAny size
Type safetyCompile-timeCompile-time (codegen)Runtime (reflection)Compile-time (generics)
Code generationNoneRequired (wire_gen.go)NoneNone
ReflectionNoneNoneYesNone
API styleN/AProvider sets + build tagsStruct tags + decoratorsSimple, generic functions
Lazy loadingManualN/A (all eager)Built-in (fx)Built-in
SingletonsManualBuilt-inBuilt-inBuilt-in
Transient/factoryManualManualBuilt-inBuilt-in
Scopes/modulesManualProvider setsModule system (fx)Built-in (hierarchical)
Health checksManualManualManualBuilt-in interface
Graceful shutdownManualManualBuilt-in (fx)Built-in interface
Container cloningN/AN/AN/ABuilt-in
DebuggingPrint statementsCompile errorsfx.Visualize()ExplainInjector(), web interface
Go versionAnyAnyAny1.18+ (generics)
Learning curveNoneMediumHighLow
Quick Comparison: Wiring Style

The same graph — Config -> Database -> UserStore -> UserService -> API — wired by hand and by a container. The contrast is what the wiring code encodes: an ordered call sequence you maintain, versus a set of providers the container orders for you.

// Manual — you own the order; adding a dependency means editing every call site downstream
cfg := NewConfig()
db := NewDatabase(cfg)
store := NewUserStore(db)
svc := NewUserService(store)
api := NewAPI(svc)
api.Run()
// No shutdown hooks, health checks, or lazy loading — add them yourself

// Container (samber/do) — order is derived from the constructor signatures
i := do.New()
do.Provide(i, NewConfig)
do.Provide(i, NewDatabase)
do.Provide(i, NewUserStore)
do.Provide(i, NewUserService)
api := do.MustInvoke[*API](i)
api.Run()
defer i.Shutdown() // shutdown and health checks come from the container

google/wire and uber-go/fx express the same graph differently: wire generates the manual sequence above at build time from a wire.Build provider list (cleanup via func() returned by providers, no lifecycle hooks), while fx registers providers with fx.Provide and resolves them by reflection at runtime with OnStart/OnStop hooks. Full wiring examples for each: google/wire, uber-go/dig + fx, samber/do.

Testing with DI

DI makes testing straightforward — inject mocks instead of real implementations:

// Define a mock
type MockUserStore struct {
    users map[string]*User
}

func (m *MockUserStore) FindByID(ctx context.Context, id string) (*User, error) {
    u, ok := m.users[id]
    if !ok {
        return nil, ErrNotFound
    }
    return u, nil
}

// Test with manual injection
func TestUserService_GetUser(t *testing.T) {
    mock := &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    }
    svc := NewUserService(mock, nil, slog.Default())

    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    if err != nil {
        t.Fatalf("unexpected error: %v", err)
    }
    if user.Name != "Alice" {
        t.Errorf("got %q, want %q", user.Name, "Alice")
    }
}
Testing with samber/do — Clone and Override

Container cloning creates an isolated copy where you override only the services you need to mock:

func TestUserService_WithDo(t *testing.T) {
    // Create a test injector with mock implementation
    testInjector := do.New()

    // Provide the mock UserStore interface
    do.OverrideValue[UserStore](testInjector, &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    })

    // Provide other real services as needed
    do.Provide[*slog.Logger](testInjector, func(i *do.Injector) (*slog.Logger, error) {
        return slog.Default(), nil
    })

    svc := do.MustInvoke[*UserService](testInjector)
    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    // ... assertions
}

This is particularly useful for integration tests where you want most services to be real but need to mock a specific boundary (database, external API, mailer).

When to Adopt a DI Library

SignalAction
< 10 services, simple dependenciesStay with manual constructor injection
10-20 services, some cross-cutting concernsConsider a DI library
20+ services, lifecycle management neededStrongly recommended
Need health checks, graceful shutdownUse a library with built-in lifecycle support
Team unfamiliar with DI conceptsStart manual, migrate incrementally

Common Mistakes

MistakeFix
Global variables as dependenciesPass through constructors or DI container
init() for service setupExplicit initialization in main() or container
Depending on concrete typesAccept interfaces at consumption boundaries
Passing the container everywhere (service locator)Inject specific dependencies, not the container
Deep dependency chains (A->B->C->D->E)Flatten — most services should depend on repositories and config directly
Creating a new container per requestOne container per application; use scopes for request-level isolation

Cross-References

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do skill for detailed samber/do usage patterns

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill for interface design and composition

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-testing skill for testing with dependency injection

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-project-layout skill for DI initialization placement

References

Files

ATTRIBUTION.md

Attribution

This folder is an unmodified copy of the Agent Skill "golang-dependency-injection", distributed by AutoGineer (https://autogineer.com/agent-skills).

The skill's own files are unmodified copies. AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by the author or the publisher.

Files added by AutoGineer

  • ATTRIBUTION.md: this file, written by AutoGineer

  • LICENSE: copied from LICENSE

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: Claude Code, OpenAI Codex

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Declares allowed tools, Claude Code frontmatter

The author says: Designed for Claude Code, Codex or similar harness, and for projects using Golang.

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Created by
samber
Publisher
Samuel Berthe (Community)
Distributed by
Samuel Berthe
Source
samber/cc-skills-golang · skills/golang-dependency-injection · commit bb1d43d
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by samber or Samuel Berthe.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download golang-dependency-injection.zip