ds-deslop
Skill20 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub
Remove AI-generated code slop introduced on the current branch and align it with the surrounding codebase.
In this repository52 other files it gives its agents.
- ds-dev-skill-benchSkill
- ds-agent-reviewSkill
- ds-architecture-planSkill
- ds-arenaSkill
- ds-blast-radiusSkill
- ds-blueprintSkill
- ds-bug-reviewSkill
- ds-clarity-reviewSkill
- ds-code-quality-reviewSkill
- ds-comment-reviewSkill
- ds-data-modeSkill
- ds-data-reviewSkill
- ds-debugSkill
- ds-doc-quality-reviewSkill
- ds-exploreSkill
- ds-git-modeSkill
- ds-go-reviewSkill
- ds-grill-meSkill
- ds-handoffSkill
- ds-howSkill
- ds-humanizeSkill
- ds-interaction-modeSkill
- ds-java-reviewSkill
- ds-notebook-reviewSkill
- ds-onboardingSkill
- ds-osvSkill
- ds-perf-planSkill
- ds-project-checkpointSkill
- ds-project-resumeSkill
- ds-python-reviewSkill
- ds-quality-gateSkill
- ds-reflectSkill
- ds-retroSkill
- ds-roadmapSkill
- ds-rust-reviewSkill
- ds-security-reviewSkill
- ds-semgrepSkill
- ds-shell-reviewSkill
- dsSkill
- ds-specSkill
- ds-step-modeSkill
- ds-tdd-modeSkill
- ds-test-modeSkill
- ds-test-quality-reviewSkill
- ds-tiger-style-modeSkill
- ds-tldtSkill
- ds-ts-reviewSkill
- ds-ui-modeSkill
- ds-ui-quality-reviewSkill
- ds-verify-thisSkill
- ds-zig-reviewSkill
- ds-zoom-outSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 7
When invoked, diff the current branch against the main branch and remove the slop the branch introduced.
- Distinctive: line 13
Treat any argument as scope (files or directories).
- Distinctive: line 27
Keep behavior unchanged unless fixing a clear bug.
- Distinctive: line 28
Prefer minimal, focused edits over broad rewrites.
≈ “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.
Files
When invoked, diff the current branch against the main branch and remove the slop the branch introduced. Preserve behavior.
The test for slop is simple: code an experienced engineer working in this language and this codebase wouldn't have written. Judge against the surrounding code and the language's idioms — not a fixed checklist.
Arguments
Treat any argument as scope (files or directories). With no scope, review the branch's diff against the main branch.
What to look for
- Narrating comments — comments that restate what the code does, or break the file's existing comment density and style.
- Defensive overkill — error handling or guards abnormal for a trusted path. The form is language-specific: a swallowed
try/catch, anif err != nilthat can't fire, anunwrap_ormasking a real invariant, a null check on a value that's never null. - Type escape hatches used only to dodge the checker — judged by the language's norms:
any/as/@ts-ignorein TypeScript or# type: ignorein Python are usually slop;any/interface{}in Go is often idiomatic. Flag the ones that exist only to silence a type error, not the idiomatic uses. - Needless nesting — deep conditionals that read better as early returns or guard clauses (or the language's equivalent:
?in Rust,match, and so on). - Speculative scaffolding — unused helpers, premature abstractions, config knobs with one possible value, placeholder TODOs.
- Anything else inconsistent with the file and surrounding code.
Guardrails
- Apply the principle, not the syntax — what's slop in one language is idiomatic in another.
- Keep behavior unchanged unless fixing a clear bug.
- Prefer minimal, focused edits over broad rewrites. Match each file's existing conventions; do not impose a new style.
Output
Apply the edits, then give a concise 1–3 sentence summary of what was removed or simplified.
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
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.

