agentleFS
JoseVelazcoHJoseVelazcoH/python-skills/skills/python-clean-code/SKILL.md

python-clean-code

Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Trigger: clean code, readable Python, refactor, naming, comments, magic numbers, data classes, code smells, DRY, KISS, YAGNI. Make Python read like prose at the line and function level.

8 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Delete comments that restate code or hold dead code.

    line 21
  2. Very specific:

    Use a function, not a class, when there is no state to hold.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Read the smell; name which gate above it hits.

    line 40
  4. Distinctive:

    Keep behavior identical; if tests exist, they must stay green.

    line 42
  5. Distinctive:

    Stop at KISS: do not introduce abstraction the current code does not need.

    line 43

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Python Clean Code

Line- and function-level readability: naming, classes-vs-functions, comments, data types, plus DRY/KISS/YAGNI.

Activation Contract

Apply when code is hard to read, a function does too much, names are cryptic, comments restate code, primitives model structured data, or the user asks to refactor/clean up Python. For class/module structure and SOLID, use python-design-principles instead.

Hard Rules

  • Name by intent: verb_noun for functions, is_/has_ for booleans, named constants for magic numbers. A good name removes the need for a comment.
  • Delete comments that restate code or hold dead code. Keep only why (rationale) and docstrings.
  • Use a function, not a class, when there is no state to hold. Use @dataclass/Enum/NamedTuple instead of tuples or raw dicts for structured data.
  • Flatten nesting with guard clauses (early return). Extract long functions into named steps.
  • Replace repeated blocks with one parameterized abstraction (DRY): but only after the third repeat, never speculative (YAGNI). Prefer the simplest construct that works (KISS).

Decision Gates

SymptomFix
Magic number / cryptic nameNamed constant / intention-revealing name
Comment explains whatDelete it; improve the name
Class with no state, only methodsPlain functions
Tuple/dict passed around as a record@dataclass or NamedTuple
4+ paramsParameter Object (@dataclass)
Deep if nestingGuard clauses
Copy-pasted block (3rd time)Extract shared function

Execution Steps

  1. Read the smell; name which gate above it hits.
  2. Show a tight # Bad → # Good diff: change one smell at a time.
  3. Keep behavior identical; if tests exist, they must stay green.
  4. Stop at KISS: do not introduce abstraction the current code does not need.
# Bad
d = 86400
def process(u):
    if u:
        if u.active:
            return charge(u)

# Good
SECONDS_IN_DAY = 86400
def charge_if_active(user: User) -> Receipt | None:
    if not user or not user.active:
        return None
    return charge(user)

Output Contract

Return the refactored Python, one smell per diff, with a one-line rationale per change. Never expand scope beyond the smell asked about.

References

  • references/naming-and-comments.md: naming and comment rules with examples.
  • references/data-and-smells.md: data-type modeling, code smells, DRY/KISS/YAGNI.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.