You can build the model from whatever: Draw it with a GUI, query your server infrastructure, analyze binaries, collect it from databases, parse it from documentation, process your issues, etc. The important points is to merge all the information into a single model.
You cannot represent this model on a screen in any meaningful way. Instead you can only get certain "views" into it to understand an aspect or answer specific questions.
Does it exist today? Many tools and processes have been developed to achieve it. For example, "Model-based systems engineering" is a very formal approach. I have yet to see it realized in practice though.
I'm pretty sure it isn't a single tool or process though. By definition it integrates with nearly everything and that means a lot of customization. You won't get it get it off the shelf.
It sounds like you're describing: https://www.ilograph.com/blog/posts/concrete-diagramming-mod...
It's a drawing or diagramming tool, but the stand-alone diagramming tools are better.
It's a text composition tool, but word processors are better.
It's a code writing tool, but IDEs are better.
In every single thing it tries to do, a specialized tool is better. So this single tool needs to be close enough to the best in every category in order to not be a boat anchor holding you back. So far, nothing has come close.
Also the design tools for it were hilariously expensive and notoriously cumbersome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-aided_software_engine...
Not sure, but IMO a dataflow diagram from good ol' SSADM got a lot of the way there. Unlike a lot of the modern techniques which model (groups of) deployed components, DFDs were strictly logical and functional and included data stores and users as well as functional components. So it was possible to model data in flow and at rest, and the characteristics of each, including where it crossed system boundaries.
IMO this was the best diagram format to get an overall view of the system, or reveal which areas needed further analysis.
It’s very complex, very interesting, and lots of work.
A practical example of this would be neural networks in AI: which collectively implement functions much greater then the individual links.
I agree that we need multiple views, but it isn't just a matter of filtering part of a single view - it's also different fundamental primitives that are needed to communicate different kinds of ideas or aspects of a given system.
To me, this seems parallel to the evolution of LLMs into multi-modality by default. Different queries will need different combinations of text, heat maps, highlights, arrows, code snippets, flow charts, architecture diagrams, etc.
It's certainly not easy, but it's exciting to consider :)
I don't understand how you can write an article about system design without mention to enterprise architect or Capella. I've read this as "we need to come up with a solution that already exists".