agentleFS
lza6lza6/claw-code-tingfeng/skills/ai-slop-cleaner/SKILL.md

ai-slop-cleaner

Skill5 starsChanged 13 days agoMITView on GitHub

Run an anti-slop cleanup/refactor/deslop workflow

10 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ultragoal, self-improve and 2 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.
  • Yeachan-HeoSkill

    ultragoal

    Create and execute durable repo-native multi-goal plans over Codex goal mode artifacts.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • markmdevSkill

    self-improve

    Analyze Claude Code sessions to find workflow frictions, underused tools, stale instructions, documentation gaps, and opportunities for new skills or automation. Produces actionable improvement suggestions with prioritized recommendations. Use when the user says "self-improve", "analyze my workflow", "what can we improve", "find frictions", "optimize workflow", or asks about improving their Claude Code setup. Also suggest running this after long sessions, multi-session projects, or when the user seems frustrated with repetitive work.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • dubwoahSkill

    ask

    Answer questions about the codebase without generating or modifying any code. Use when the user wants to understand how something works, find where something is defined, or explore the project structure. Invoked with /ask.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GitHubSkill

    autoresearch

    Autonomous iterative experimentation loop for any programming task. Guides the user through defining goals, measurable metrics, and scope constraints, then runs an autonomous loop of code changes, testing, measuring, and keeping/discarding results. Inspired by Karpathy''s autoresearch. USE FOR: autonomous improvement, iterative optimization, experiment loop, auto research, performance tuning, automated experimentation, hill climbing, try things automatically, optimize code, run experiments, autonomous coding loop. DO NOT USE FOR: one-shot tasks, simple bug fixes, code review, or tasks without a measurable metric.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

13 rules. 0 are common, 13 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 13

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill when:

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Follow-up implementation left duplicate code, dead code, weak boundaries, missing tests, or unnecessary wrapper layers

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep outputs concise and evidence-dense unless risk or the user requests more detail.

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    Treat newer user instructions as local workflow updates without discarding earlier non-conflicting constraints.

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    Keep using inspection, tests, diagnostics, and verification until the cleanup is grounded.

    line 22
  6. Distinctive:

    When the caller provides a changed-files list (for example, Ralph session-owned edits), keep the cleanup strictly bounded to those files.

    line 28
  7. Distinctive:

    Add or run targeted regression tests before editing cleanup candidates

    line 35
  8. Distinctive:

    If behavior is currently untested, create the narrowest test coverage needed first

    line 36
  9. Distinctive:

    If a file list scope is provided, keep the pass restricted to that changed-files list

    line 41
  10. Distinctive:

    Do not start coding until the cleanup plan is explicit

    line 43
  11. Distinctive:

    Avoid bundling unrelated refactors into the same edit set

    line 58
  12. Distinctive:

    No new abstractions or dependencies unless explicitly required

    line 67
  13. Distinctive:

    Bad: Start rewriting architecture before protecting behavior with tests.

    line 112

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 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

AI Slop Cleaner Skill

Reduce AI-generated slop with a regression-tests-first, smell-by-smell cleanup workflow that preserves behavior and raises signal quality.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

  • A code path works but feels bloated, noisy, repetitive, or over-abstracted
  • A user asks to “cleanup”, “refactor”, or “deslop” AI-generated output
  • Follow-up implementation left duplicate code, dead code, weak boundaries, missing tests, or unnecessary wrapper layers
  • You need a disciplined cleanup workflow without broad rewrites

GPT-5.4 Guidance Alignment

  • Keep outputs concise and evidence-dense unless risk or the user requests more detail.
  • Treat newer user instructions as local workflow updates without discarding earlier non-conflicting constraints.
  • Keep using inspection, tests, diagnostics, and verification until the cleanup is grounded.
  • Proceed automatically through clear, reversible cleanup steps; ask only when a choice materially changes scope or behavior.

Scoped File Lists and Ralph Workflow

  • This skill can accept a file list scope instead of a whole feature area.
  • When the caller provides a changed-files list (for example, Ralph session-owned edits), keep the cleanup strictly bounded to those files.
  • In the Ralph workflow, the mandatory deslop pass should run this skill on Ralph's changed files only, in standard mode unless the caller explicitly requests otherwise.

Procedure

  1. Lock behavior with regression tests first
    • Identify the behavior that must not change
    • Add or run targeted regression tests before editing cleanup candidates
    • If behavior is currently untested, create the narrowest test coverage needed first
  2. Create a cleanup plan before code
    • List the specific smells to remove
    • Bound the pass to the requested files/scope
    • If a file list scope is provided, keep the pass restricted to that changed-files list
    • Order fixes from safest/highest-signal to riskiest
    • Do not start coding until the cleanup plan is explicit
  3. Categorize issues before editing
    • Duplication — repeated logic, copy-paste branches, redundant helpers
    • Dead code — unused code, unreachable branches, stale flags, debug leftovers
    • Needless abstraction — pass-through wrappers, speculative indirection, single-use helper layers
    • Boundary violations — hidden coupling, leaky responsibilities, wrong-layer imports or side effects
    • Missing tests — behavior not locked, weak regression coverage, gaps around edge cases
  4. Execute passes one smell at a time
    • Pass 1: Dead code deletion
    • Pass 2: Duplicate removal
    • Pass 3: Naming/error handling cleanup
    • Pass 4: Test reinforcement
    • Re-run targeted verification after each pass
    • Avoid bundling unrelated refactors into the same edit set
  5. Run quality gates
    • Regression tests stay green
    • Lint passes
    • Typecheck passes
    • Relevant unit/integration tests pass
    • Static/security scan passes when available
    • Diff stays minimal and scoped
    • No new abstractions or dependencies unless explicitly required
  6. Finish with an evidence-dense report
    • Changed files
    • Simplifications made
    • Tests/diagnostics/build checks run
    • Remaining risks
    • Residual follow-ups or consciously deferred cleanup

Output Format

AI SLOP CLEANUP REPORT
======================

Scope: [files or feature area]
Behavior Lock: [targeted regression tests added/run]
Cleanup Plan: [bounded smells and order]

Passes Completed:
1. Pass 1: Dead code deletion - [concise fix]
2. Pass 2: Duplicate removal - [concise fix]
3. Pass 3: Naming/error handling cleanup - [concise fix]
4. Pass 4: Test reinforcement - [concise fix]

Quality Gates:
- Regression tests: PASS/FAIL
- Lint: PASS/FAIL
- Typecheck: PASS/FAIL
- Tests: PASS/FAIL
- Static/security scan: PASS/FAIL or N/A

Changed Files:
- [path] - [simplification]

Remaining Risks:
- [none or short deferred item]

Scenario Examples

Good: The user says continue after tests already lock behavior and the next smell pass is clear. Continue with the next bounded cleanup pass.

Good: The user narrows the scope to a specific file after planning. Keep the regression-tests-first workflow, but apply the new scope locally.

Bad: Start rewriting architecture before protecting behavior with tests.

Bad: Collapse multiple smell categories into one large refactor with no intermediate verification.

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.