agentleFS
equinorequinor/neqsim/.github/skills/neqsim-code-health/SKILL.md

neqsim-code-health

Skill167 starsChanged 7 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Assess NeqSim maintainability, technical debt, dependency boundaries, complexity hotspots, duplication and new static-analysis findings. Use for code-health triage, a maintenance backlog, or planning a bounded refactoring with evidence.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Read docs/development/CODE_HEALTH.md for commands, baseline policy and limitations.

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    Use current source and the exact base/head revisions.

    line 9
  3. Very specific:

    Run devtools/code_health.py --output <evidence.json> with the selected Python executable.

    line 14
  4. Distinctive:

    Use the exact reviewed analysis JDK.

    line 19
  5. Distinctive:

    Check open work before selecting a change.

    line 29

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Assess code health

Read docs/development/CODE_HEALTH.md for commands, baseline policy and limitations. Use current source and the exact base/head revisions. Discover existing implementations with devtools/capability_search.py before proposing new APIs. In connector-only sessions, inspect current GitHub source and CI artifacts; mark local checks unrun instead of assuming that a checkout or build tool is available.

  1. Run devtools/code_health.py --output <evidence.json> with the selected Python executable. Inspect findings and measured file metrics, not just the exit code.
  2. Generate and supply PMD and SpotBugs reports for a static-analysis assessment. Missing reports or analysis errors are failures. Distinguish unmeasured coverage and unavailable history from measured zero values. Use the exact reviewed analysis JDK; a runtime precondition failure is not a zero-findings pass. For clone warnings, inspect parent and owned-state copies, preserve normal copy behavior and propagate failures with their cause. For CT_CONSTRUCTOR_THROW, preserve constructor validation and prevent finalizer access to partially initialized objects. New implementations without an inheritance contract can be final; retain the interface as the extension point and document that choice. Do not suppress the detector or remove validation to pass the gate.
  3. Rank candidates using branch counts, size, import dependencies, duplicate-window candidates, bounded history and relevant regression evidence. Size/branch counts are proxies; overlapping duplicate windows are not a percentage of duplicated code.
  4. Check open work before selecting a change. Keep one coherent maintenance PR and coordinate overlapping files with existing campaigns.
  5. State the problem, extension point, public contracts, numerical/performance risk, test commands and acceptance criteria. Prefer one responsibility with known callers.
  6. Hand implementation to @refactor with neqsim-safe-refactoring, then request independent @code-review using neqsim-code-review. Reuse @neqsim-test and @documentation for distinct test and documentation work.

Return a ranked, source-linked backlog and a bounded first task. Record exact checks, exit results and unresolved evidence. Never refresh the baseline to make a failure pass; propose each baseline change explicitly with a reason. Do not call discovery coverage or a maintenance metric numerical qualification.

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.