agentleFS
igmarinigmarin/rails-agent-skills/skills/refactor-code/SKILL.md

refactor-code

Skill26 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when changing Rails structure without changing behavior. Characterization tests must be green first. Trigger words: refactor, extract, restructure, split class.

16 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use debug-issue, create-pr and 1 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • NVIDIASkill

    debug-issue

    Use when the user asks to debug, investigate, or fix a GitHub issue or supplies a repository bug report.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SentrySkill

    create-pr

    Create pull requests following Sentry conventions. Use when opening PRs, writing PR descriptions, or preparing changes for review. Follows Sentry's code review guidelines.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SentrySkill

    security-review

    Finds exploitable application security vulnerabilities in code changes. Use for Warden security scans, appsec review, OWASP-style checks, authentication or authorization bugs, injection, XSS, SSRF, path traversal, secrets, unsafe crypto, webhook verification, open redirects, or sensitive data exposure.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    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:

    Use this skill when the task is to change structure without changing intended behavior.

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    Write this before touching any production file: No refactoring step begins until this test exists and passes on the current (un-refactored) …

    line 53
  3. Very specific:

    Run it: bundle exec rspec spec/requests/orders_spec.rb — it must pass on the current code.

    line 71
  4. Distinctive:

    Run verification after every refactoring step:

    line 105
  5. Distinctive:

    Run the full test suite.

    line 106
  6. Distinctive:

    Read the output — check exit code, count failures.

    line 107
  7. Distinctive:

    If tests fail: STOP, undo the step, investigate.

    line 108
  8. Distinctive:

    If tests pass: proceed to next step.

    line 109
  9. Distinctive:

    Only claim completion with evidence from the last test run — report the last line of output (e.g.

    line 110

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 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

Refactor Code

Use this skill when the task is to change structure without changing intended behavior.

Core principle: Small, reversible steps over large rewrites. Separate design improvement from behavior change.

Quick Reference

StepActionVerification
1Define stable behaviorWritten statement of what must not change
2Add characterization testsTests pass on current code
3Choose smallest safe sliceOne boundary at a time
4Rename, move, or extractTests still pass
5Remove compatibility shimsTests still pass, new path proven

HARD-GATE

NO REFACTORING WITHOUT CHARACTERIZATION TESTS FIRST.
NEVER mix behavior changes with structural refactors in the same step —
  if behavior changes are also needed, complete the structural refactor first,
  then apply behavior changes in a separate step with its own test.
ONE boundary per refactoring step — never extract two abstractions in the same step.
If a public interface changes, document the compatibility shim and its removal condition.
NEVER fabricate test output — label only actual run output as Observed output.

Core Process

1. Define stable behavior

Identify the exact inputs and outputs of the logic being refactored. Keep public interfaces stable until callers are migrated. Prefer adapters, facades, or wrappers for transitional states.

Include in your output:

  • Stable behavior statement: an explicit statement of what must not change (inputs/outputs, public interfaces).
  • Shim decision: name any transitional adapter/facade/wrapper and its removal condition, or state why none is needed.

2. Add characterization tests

Write this before touching any production file. No refactoring step begins until this test exists and passes on the current (un-refactored) code. If the characterization spec fails, do not continue — stop and fix the test or the behavior mismatch.

# spec/requests/orders_spec.rb  (or service/model spec — mirror the file being refactored)
# frozen_string_literal: true

RSpec.describe "Orders#create current behavior", type: :request do
  describe "POST /orders" do
    let(:valid_params) { { order: { product_id: 1, quantity: 2 } } }

    it "creates order and enqueues warehouse notification" do
      expect { post orders_path, params: valid_params }
        .to change(Order, :count).by(1)
      expect(NotifyWarehouseJob).to have_been_enqueued
    end
  end
end

Run it: bundle exec rspec spec/requests/orders_spec.rb — it must pass on the current code.

3. Choose the smallest safe slice

Good first moves include: renaming unclear methods, isolating duplicated logic behind a shared object, or wrapping external integrations before moving call sites. Add narrow seams before deleting old code paths. One boundary at a time — characterization tests first, verification after each step.

4. Execute extraction/refactor (One step at a time)

Extract, move, or rename logic. Stop and simplify if the refactor introduces more indirection than clarity.

Minimal Inline Example (Controller orchestration extraction)

Before:

def create
  order = OrderCreator.new(params).call
  NotifyWarehouseJob.perform_later(order.id)
  redirect_to order_path(order)
end

After:

def create
  order = Orders::CreateOrder.call(params: params)
  redirect_to order_path(order)
end

Extended Resources (Progressive Disclosure)

Load these files only when their specific content is needed:

  • assets/complete_example.md — A complete, step-by-step example of a high-scoring answer.md showing plan, stable behavior, characterization tests, step-by-step verification runs, and final suite verification command outputs.
  • EXAMPLES.md — For more examples of extracting services and renaming in small batches.

5. Verification Protocol

Run verification after every refactoring step:

  1. Run the full test suite.
  2. Read the output — check exit code, count failures.
  3. If tests fail: STOP, undo the step, investigate.
  4. If tests pass: proceed to next step.
  5. Only claim completion with evidence from the last test run — report the last line of output (e.g. "5 examples, 0 failures").

Report test run output at EACH step — not only at the end. At least two separate Observed output entries at different sequence points are required.

Evidence labelling rules: Label actual run output as Observed output only. Never use labels such as "Expected output", "Required output", "Planned output", or "Must produce 0 failures" as substitutes for actual observed run output. If you have not run the tests, you have no observed output to report.

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.