agentleFS
jabrenajabrena/cursor-rules-java/skills/053-design-simple-rules/SKILL.md

053-design-simple-rules

Skill452 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use when Java design, refactoring, or implementation tradeoffs should be evaluated with Kent Beck's simple design rules, including passes the tests, reveals intention, has no duplication, and has the fewest elements. This should trigger for requests such as Apply simple design rules; Review this design with Beck's rules; Choose between these refactoring options; Keep this Java design simple. Part of Plinth Toolkit

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

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

    MUST: read references/053-design-simple-rules.md before applying the rules

    line 26
  2. Distinctive:

    MUST: treat passing tests as the correctness boundary before design cleanup

    line 28
  3. Distinctive:

    MUST: prefer clear intention over abstraction for its own sake

    line 29
  4. Distinctive:

    MUST: consider fewer elements only after correctness, clarity, and duplication have been addressed

    line 31
  5. Distinctive:

    Use Beck's simple design rules

    line 36
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep this Java design simple

    line 39
  7. Very specific:

    Read references/053-design-simple-rules.md, then identify the behavior under discussion and the tests, characterization checks, build …

    line 46
  8. Distinctive:

    After correctness, clarity, and duplication are handled, remove unnecessary classes, methods, parameters, branches, layers, configuration, …

    line 58

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 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

Simple Design Rules

Guide Java developers through Kent Beck's simple design rules when evaluating design and refactoring choices. This is an interactive SKILL.

What is covered in this Skill?

  • Using tests as the first correctness boundary before design cleanup
  • Revealing intention and maximizing clarity before abstraction pressure
  • Reducing duplication without hiding domain meaning or worsening readability
  • Treating fewer elements as the final simplification pressure after correctness, clarity, and duplication
  • Comparing Java design and refactoring options with the ordered rules
  • Reporting the chosen option, tradeoffs, validation signal, and remaining risk

Constraints

Apply simple design rules in priority order, and do not optimize later rules by weakening earlier rules.

  • MUST read references/053-design-simple-rules.md before applying the rules
  • MUST evaluate the rules in this order: passes the tests, reveals intention, has no duplication, has the fewest elements
  • MUST treat passing tests as the correctness boundary before design cleanup
  • MUST prefer clear intention over abstraction for its own sake
  • MUST reduce duplication only when the result preserves or improves clarity
  • MUST consider fewer elements only after correctness, clarity, and duplication have been addressed

When to use this skill

  • Apply simple design rules
  • Use Beck's simple design rules
  • Review this design with simple design rules
  • Choose between these refactoring options
  • Keep this Java design simple
  • Does this design pass the simple design rules?

Workflow

  1. Anchor Correctness

Read references/053-design-simple-rules.md, then identify the behavior under discussion and the tests, characterization checks, build checks, or manual evidence that define whether the code works.

  1. Reveal Intention

Evaluate whether names, types, responsibilities, control flow, API shape, and test descriptions make the domain decision clear to a future maintainer.

  1. Reduce Duplication Carefully

Find repeated knowledge, policy, mappings, validation, queries, or workflow decisions. Remove duplication only when the abstraction keeps the intent easier to understand.

  1. Minimize Elements Last

After correctness, clarity, and duplication are handled, remove unnecessary classes, methods, parameters, branches, layers, configuration, or indirection that no longer pay for themselves.

  1. Compare Options and Report

Compare available design or refactoring options against the ordered rules. Recommend the option that satisfies the earlier rules best, describe rejected tradeoffs, and name the verification signal.

Reference

For detailed guidance, examples, and constraints, see references/053-design-simple-rules.md.

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.