Integrating your photo app with Apple Intelligence

At a glance

Project structure

Source bundle/
└── PhotosDomainExample/
    ├── PhotosDomainExample.swift
    ├── AppIntents/
    │   ├── Album/
    │   │   └── AlbumIntents.swift
    │   ├── ShortcutsProvider.swift
    │   └── Asset/
    │       └── AssetIntents.swift
    ├── Managers/
    │   ├── ImageManager.swift
    │   ├── NavigationManager.swift
    │   └── LocationManager.swift
    ├── Views/
    │   ├── Album/
    │   │   ├── AlbumNameView.swift
    │   │   └── AlbumDetailView.swift
    │   ├── Asset/
    │   │   └── AssetDetailView.swift
    │   └── FavoriteView.swift
    └── ContentView.swift

Structure observations

• Architecturally prominent files are ranked from entry points and role-named declarations; resource-only paths are omitted.
• Primary languages: Swift.
• The verified tree contains 5 project/configuration file(s) and 45 source declaration(s).

Overall architecture

flowchart LR
    N1["PhotosDomainExample"]
    N2["ContentView"]
    N3["ImageManager"]
    N4["ExampleAppShortcutsProvider"]
    N5["AppIntents APIs"]
    N1 --> N2
    N2 --> N3
    N3 --> N4
    N4 --> N5

Reference code

PhotosDomainExample/PhotosDomainExample.swift:11 — architecture anchor

@main
struct PhotosDomainExample: App {

    // MARK: Life cycle

    let library: MediaLibrary
    let navigationManager: NavigationManager

    init() {
        let navigationManager = NavigationManager()
        let library = MediaLibrary()
        library.load()
        AppDependencyManager.shared.add(dependency: library)
        AppDependencyManager.shared.add(dependency: navigationManager)
        self.library = library
        self.navigationManager = navigationManager
    }

    var body: some Scene {
        WindowGroup {
            ContentView()
        }
        .environment(library)
        .environment(navigationManager)
    }
}

Interpretation

The arrows summarize the source-visible entry, role-named types or folders, and framework direction; when nodes come from structural folders, the sequence is a high-level interpretation rather than proof that every adjacent node calls the next. Ownership is claimed only where the next section cites a stored property or assignment. The diagram is intentionally limited to the dominant path into App Intents.

Ownership and state

classDiagram
    CreateAlbumIntent *-- String : name
    CreateAlbumIntent o-- MediaLibrary : library
    OpenAlbumIntent o-- AlbumEntity : target
    OpenAlbumIntent o-- MediaLibrary : library

Ownership evidence

PhotosDomainExample/AppIntents/Album/AlbumIntents.swift:13 — stored dependency or nearest verified ownership anchor

@AppIntent(schema: .photos.createAlbum)
struct CreateAlbumIntent: AppIntent {
    var name: String
    // ...
}

Composition arrows indicate a source-visible construction expression or locally owned value state; aggregation means the owner stores or receives a dependency without proving exclusive lifetime ownership.

Concurrency, scheduling, and thread safety

Evidence limit: actor isolation, async/await, or Task creation does not by itself prove background-thread execution; Sendable conformance alone does not prove thread-safe mutation.

@MainActor/MainActor.run, DispatchQueue.main, and RunLoop.main are reported as distinct isolation, queue, and event-loop mechanisms. A plain Task is kept separate from Task.detached; neither is labeled as a background thread.

Reference code

PhotosDomainExample/AppIntents/Album/AlbumEntity.swift:40 — representative execution boundary

        @MainActor
        func entities(for identifiers: [AlbumEntity.ID]) async throws -> [AlbumEntity] {
            library.albums(for: identifiers).map(\.entity)
        }

State propagation, frameworks, and dependencies

Evidence limit: an import proves a source-level compilation dependency at the cited line; it does not prove runtime use, architectural adoption, or whether a Swift package is a direct application dependency.

receive(on:) describes downstream delivery scheduling, while subscribe(on:) describes upstream subscription/request/cancel scheduling. An import Combine alone establishes neither behavior nor a Store, reducer, Redux, or other application architecture.

Class and protocol design

PhotosDomainExample/AppIntents/ShortcutsProvider.swift:10 — representative type boundary

struct ExampleAppShortcutsProvider: AppShortcutsProvider {
    // ...
            shortTitle: "Create",
            systemImageName: "photo.badge.plus"
    // ...
}

No local protocol conformance is claimed as protocol-oriented design; external framework conformances are listed only as dependencies.

Access control

Reference code

PhotosDomainExample/ContentView.swift:14 — representative boundary

struct ContentView: View {
    // ...
    @Environment(MediaLibrary.self) private var library
    // ...
}

Swift declarations without a modifier are internal; explicit private, fileprivate, private(set), public, or open entries above are interpreted by language semantics. Objective-C/C samples instead rely on header and implementation boundaries, which are not equivalent to Swift lexical privacy.

Logic ownership and placement

Design patterns

Naming conventions

• Types: Manager: ImageManager, LocationManager, NavigationManager; Provider: ExampleAppShortcutsProvider; View: AlbumDetailView, AlbumNameView, AssetDetailView, AssetView, ContentView.
• Protocols: no local protocol declaration in the scanned source.
• Methods: perform, startCaching, stopCaching, requestImage, openAsset, openAlbum, openSearch, saveAction.
• Files: PhotosDomainExample/PhotosDomainExample.swift, PhotosDomainExample/Managers/ImageManager.swift, PhotosDomainExample/Managers/NavigationManager.swift, PhotosDomainExample/Views/Album/AlbumNameView.swift, PhotosDomainExample/Views/Asset/AssetDetailView.swift, PhotosDomainExample/ContentView.swift.

Architecture takeaways

• PhotosDomainExample is the main source-visible entry or composition anchor for this sample.
• Framework work reaches SwiftUI, AppIntents, Photos, GeoToolbox through a deliberately small high-level chain; the detailed API graph remains inside the cited implementation files.
• Stored-property evidence identifies lifecycle collaboration; it does not by itself prove exclusive object ownership.
• Access-control conclusions separate verified language visibility from the likely design rationale.
• The source does not justify labeling the design protocol-oriented.

Source map

• Official Apple documentation