agentleFS
lithammerlithammer/ai/skills/simplify/SKILL.md

simplify

Skill0 starsChanged 52 days agoMITView on GitHub

Clean up changed code without changing behavior — review it for reuse, simplification, efficiency, and altitude, then apply the fixes. Quality only; it does not hunt for correctness bugs.

119 other projects use a version of this, 4 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use codex-system, design-tracker and 10 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.
  • gaebalaiSkill

    codex-system

    PROACTIVELY consult Codex CLI, your highly capable supporter with exceptional reasoning and task completion abilities. Codex is a trusted expert you should ALWAYS consult BEFORE making decisions on: design choices, implementation approaches, debugging strategies, refactoring plans, or any non-trivial problem. When uncertain, consult Codex. Don't hesitate - Codex provides better analysis. Explicit triggers: "think deeper", "analyze", "second opinion", "consult codex".

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • gaebalaiSkill

    design-tracker

    PROACTIVELY track and document project design decisions without being asked. Activate automatically when detecting architecture discussions, implementation decisions, pattern choices, library selections, or any technical decisions. Also use when user explicitly says "記録して", "設計どうなってる", "record this". Do NOT wait for user to ask - record important decisions immediately.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • mike22890Skill

    clonedeps

    将项目依赖的第三方库源码克隆到本地,便于深入阅读和调试。当需要查看库的实现细节、阅读源码、调试第三方依赖、理解 SDK/framework 内部机制、查看 node_modules 之外的原始代码、分析开源库架构、学习他人代码、查看依赖的 TypeScript 类型定义时使用。

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • mdrubelamin2Skill

    verification-planning

    Plans how to prove a change works or broke nothing: frames the claim, designs an evidence path from the system itself, and requires every check to be able to fail.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • devbrother2024Skill

    artifact-design

    단독 self-contained HTML 산출물(랜딩 페이지, 정적 문서·리포트, 독립 대시보드, 데모·게임, 개발 전 UX/UI 대안 비교 목업)을 만들 때 팔레트·타이포그래피·레이아웃을 의도적으로 설계하고 템플릿·AI스러운 디자인을 피하도록 돕는 디자인 가이드. HTML/CSS를 쓰기 전에 로드한다. "랜딩 만들어줘", "이 내용 단일 HTML로 예쁘게", "UX 대안 HTML로 비교해줘", "디자인 잡아줘"처럼 단독 HTML 아티팩트를 만들거나 비교하는 요청에 활성화하고, 기존 앱(React·Vue 등)의 인앱 컴포넌트 수정이나 순수 백엔드·로직 작업에는 쓰지 않는다.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • codebycoreySkill

    batch

    Create multiple proposals from free-form feature descriptions. Use when planning several features at once, batch creating proposals, or setting up related changes.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • +3 more from gaebalai

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 111 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    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. Very specific:

    Run git diff @{upstream}...HEAD to get the diff under review.

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    Run them in parallel if the harness supports it.

    line 26
  3. Distinctive:

    Check that each change fixes the root cause at the right depth rather than patching a symptom with a fragile bandaid.

    line 60
  4. Distinctive:

    Wait for all four angles to report, dedup findings that point at the same line or mechanism, and fix each remaining one directly.

    line 68

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 111 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

Simplify

Improve the quality of the changed code. Review it for reuse, simplification, efficiency, and altitude issues, then fix what you find. Do not look for correctness bugs — that is a dedicated review pass, not this one.

Phase 0 — Gather the diff

Run git diff @{upstream}...HEAD to get the diff under review. Without an upstream, diff against the merge-base with the default branch, detected dynamically (e.g. git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD), and fall back to git diff HEAD~1. If that range is empty or there are uncommitted changes, also run git diff HEAD and include the working tree — this often runs before the commit. If the invocation names a target — a PR, a branch, a path — review that instead. Treat this diff as the review scope.

Phase 1 — Review (four cleanup angles)

Spawn one subagent per angle below, each given the diff and its own angle. Run them in parallel if the harness supports it; otherwise serialize. If the harness has no subagents, work through all four angles yourself in one pass — do not drop an angle for lack of fan-out — and say so in the summary, so the reader isn't misled about what ran.

Each angle returns its findings with file, line, a one-line summary, and the concrete cost: what is duplicated, wasted, or made harder to maintain.

Once all reports are in, or if the run stops or fails, release the reviewers this run started and no others.

Reuse

Flag new code that re-implements something the codebase already has — search shared and utility modules and the files adjacent to the change, and name the existing helper to call instead.

Simplification

Flag unnecessary complexity the diff adds: redundant or derivable state, copy-paste with slight variation, deep nesting, dead code left behind. Name the simpler form that does the same job.

Efficiency

Flag wasted work the diff introduces: redundant computation or repeated I/O, independent operations run sequentially, blocking work added to startup or hot paths. Also flag long-lived objects built from closures or captured environments — they keep the entire enclosing scope alive for the object's lifetime (a memory leak when that scope holds large values); prefer a class or struct that copies only the fields it needs. Name the cheaper alternative.

Altitude

Check that each change fixes the root cause at the right depth rather than patching a symptom with a fragile bandaid. Special cases layered on shared infrastructure are a sign the fix isn't deep enough — prefer the simpler, more general change to the underlying mechanism over adding special cases, and name that change.

Phase 2 — Apply the fixes

Wait for all four angles to report, dedup findings that point at the same line or mechanism, and fix each remaining one directly. Skip any finding whose fix would change intended behavior, require changes well outside the reviewed diff, or that you judge to be a false positive — note the skip rather than arguing with it. Finish with a brief summary of what was fixed and what was skipped (or confirm the code was already clean).

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.