code-refactoring
Skill1 starsChanged 49 days agoMITView on GitHub
Simplify and refactor code while preserving behavior, improving clarity, and reducing complexity. Use when simplifying complex code, removing duplication, or applying design patterns. Handles Extract Method, DRY principle, SOLID principles, behavior validation, and refactoring patterns.
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- myths-labs/musetheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- Ultimate-Alchemy/claude-skillsword for word, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- tstapler/dotfilestheir own version, first seen Oct 10, 2026
- pepebot-space/skillstheir own version, first seen Feb 16, 2026
- Willhong/claude_skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 17, 2025
- WomenDefiningAI/claude-code-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2025
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- Ultimate-Alchemy/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- myths-labs/muse★ 38same name
- WomenDefiningAI/claude-code-skills★ 10same name
- tstapler/dotfiles★ 8same name
- pepebot-space/skills★ 2same name
- Willhong/claude_skill★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository113 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- ac-ideateSkill
- ac-listSkill
- ac-roadmapSkill
- agentbridge-mcpSkill
- almanacSkill
- almquist-shellSkill
- ansible-fleetSkill
- apfsSkill
- apple-siliconSkill
- arena-actorsSkill
- asustor-nasSkill
- a-teamSkill
- atem-miniSkill
- at-tuiSkill
- autoresearchSkill
- babysitSkill
- bonzibuddySkill
- bop-brainstormSkill
- bop-catalogSkill
- bop-onSkill
- bop-teamSkill
- bop-workflowSkill
- bsd-portabilitySkill
- codex-personasSkill
- context-graphSkill
- councilSkill
- datadog-backupSkill
- dd-tagsSkill
- delegateSkill
- deming-pdsaSkill
- deterministic-replaySkill
- dispatch-nuSkill
- durable-commitSkill
- elixir-gastown-opsSkill
- ergo-ircSkill
- esp32-tang-bridgeSkill
- fleet-evalSkill
- fleet-ircSkill
- freebsd-build-vmSkill
- freebsd-piSkill
- freebsdSkill
- ganttSkill
- gastown-opsSkill
- gastown-slingSkill
- gh-authSkill
- gitea-releaseSkill
- gitea-runnerSkill
- henshuSkill
- irclaw-cluster-opsSkill
- irclaw-research-teamSkill
- irc-taskSkill
- jail-factorySkill
- jjSkill
- jobcard-systemSkill
- kubernetesSkill
- leptosSkill
- loreSkill
- lower-bound-reviewSkill
- macvlan-netSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
6
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
- Distinctive: line 337
Test first: Write tests before refactoring
- Distinctive: line 339
Behavior preservation: No functional changes
- Distinctive: line 343
Multiple tasks simultaneously: No refactoring + feature addition at the same time
- Distinctive: line 348
Boy Scout Rule: Leave code cleaner than you found it
- Distinctive: line 352
Small commits: Commit in focused units
- Distinctive: line 446
Round 3 (Executor): Test or static analysis verification
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.
Files
Code Refactoring
When to use this skill
- Code review: Discovering complex or duplicated code
- Before adding new features: Cleaning up existing code
- After bug fixes: Removing root causes
- Resolving technical debt: Regular refactoring
Instructions
Step 1: Extract Method
Before (long function):
function processOrder(order: Order) {
// Validation
if (!order.items || order.items.length === 0) {
throw new Error('Order must have items');
}
if (!order.customerId) {
throw new Error('Order must have customer');
}
// Price calculation
let total = 0;
for (const item of order.items) {
total += item.price * item.quantity;
}
const tax = total * 0.1;
const shipping = total > 100 ? 0 : 10;
const finalTotal = total + tax + shipping;
// Inventory check
for (const item of order.items) {
const product = await db.product.findUnique({ where: { id: item.productId } });
if (product.stock < item.quantity) {
throw new Error(`Insufficient stock for ${product.name}`);
}
}
// Create order
const newOrder = await db.order.create({
data: {
customerId: order.customerId,
items: order.items,
total: finalTotal,
status: 'pending'
}
});
return newOrder;
}After (method extraction):
async function processOrder(order: Order) {
validateOrder(order);
const total = calculateTotal(order);
await checkInventory(order);
return await createOrder(order, total);
}
function validateOrder(order: Order) {
if (!order.items || order.items.length === 0) {
throw new Error('Order must have items');
}
if (!order.customerId) {
throw new Error('Order must have customer');
}
}
function calculateTotal(order: Order): number {
const subtotal = order.items.reduce((sum, item) => sum + item.price * item.quantity, 0);
const tax = subtotal * 0.1;
const shipping = subtotal > 100 ? 0 : 10;
return subtotal + tax + shipping;
}
async function checkInventory(order: Order) {
for (const item of order.items) {
const product = await db.product.findUnique({ where: { id: item.productId } });
if (product.stock < item.quantity) {
throw new Error(`Insufficient stock for ${product.name}`);
}
}
}
async function createOrder(order: Order, total: number) {
return await db.order.create({
data: {
customerId: order.customerId,
items: order.items,
total,
status: 'pending'
}
});
}Step 2: Remove Duplication
Before (duplication):
async function getActiveUsers() {
return await db.user.findMany({
where: { status: 'active', deletedAt: null },
select: { id: true, name: true, email: true }
});
}
async function getActivePremiumUsers() {
return await db.user.findMany({
where: { status: 'active', deletedAt: null, plan: 'premium' },
select: { id: true, name: true, email: true }
});
}After (extract common logic):
type UserFilter = {
plan?: string;
};
async function getActiveUsers(filter: UserFilter = {}) {
return await db.user.findMany({
where: {
status: 'active',
deletedAt: null,
...filter
},
select: { id: true, name: true, email: true }
});
}
// Usage
const allActiveUsers = await getActiveUsers();
const premiumUsers = await getActiveUsers({ plan: 'premium' });Step 3: Replace Conditional with Polymorphism
Before (long if-else):
class PaymentProcessor {
process(payment: Payment) {
if (payment.method === 'credit_card') {
// Credit card processing
const cardToken = this.tokenizeCard(payment.card);
const charge = this.chargeCreditCard(cardToken, payment.amount);
return charge;
} else if (payment.method === 'paypal') {
// PayPal processing
const paypalOrder = this.createPayPalOrder(payment.amount);
const approval = this.getPayPalApproval(paypalOrder);
return approval;
} else if (payment.method === 'bank_transfer') {
// Bank transfer processing
const transfer = this.initiateBankTransfer(payment.account, payment.amount);
return transfer;
}
}
}After (polymorphism):
interface PaymentMethod {
process(payment: Payment): Promise<PaymentResult>;
}
class CreditCardPayment implements PaymentMethod {
async process(payment: Payment): Promise<PaymentResult> {
const cardToken = await this.tokenizeCard(payment.card);
return await this.chargeCreditCard(cardToken, payment.amount);
}
}
class PayPalPayment implements PaymentMethod {
async process(payment: Payment): Promise<PaymentResult> {
const order = await this.createPayPalOrder(payment.amount);
return await this.getPayPalApproval(order);
}
}
class BankTransferPayment implements PaymentMethod {
async process(payment: Payment): Promise<PaymentResult> {
return await this.initiateBankTransfer(payment.account, payment.amount);
}
}
class PaymentProcessor {
private methods: Map<string, PaymentMethod> = new Map([
['credit_card', new CreditCardPayment()],
['paypal', new PayPalPayment()],
['bank_transfer', new BankTransferPayment()]
]);
async process(payment: Payment): Promise<PaymentResult> {
const method = this.methods.get(payment.method);
if (!method) {
throw new Error(`Unknown payment method: ${payment.method}`);
}
return await method.process(payment);
}
}Step 4: Introduce Parameter Object
Before (many parameters):
function createUser(
name: string,
email: string,
password: string,
age: number,
country: string,
city: string,
postalCode: string,
phoneNumber: string
) {
// ...
}After (grouped into object):
interface UserProfile {
name: string;
email: string;
password: string;
age: number;
}
interface Address {
country: string;
city: string;
postalCode: string;
}
interface CreateUserParams {
profile: UserProfile;
address: Address;
phoneNumber: string;
}
function createUser(params: CreateUserParams) {
const { profile, address, phoneNumber } = params;
// ...
}
// Usage
createUser({
profile: { name: 'John', email: 'john@example.com', password: 'xxx', age: 30 },
address: { country: 'US', city: 'NYC', postalCode: '10001' },
phoneNumber: '+1234567890'
});Step 5: Apply SOLID Principles
Single Responsibility:
// ❌ Bad example: multiple responsibilities
class User {
constructor(public name: string, public email: string) {}
save() {
// Save to DB
}
sendEmail(subject: string, body: string) {
// Send email
}
generateReport() {
// Generate report
}
}
// ✅ Good example: separated responsibilities
class User {
constructor(public name: string, public email: string) {}
}
class UserRepository {
save(user: User) {
// Save to DB
}
}
class EmailService {
send(to: string, subject: string, body: string) {
// Send email
}
}
class UserReportGenerator {
generate(user: User) {
// Generate report
}
}Output format
Refactoring Checklist
- [ ] Function does one thing only (SRP)
- [ ] Function name clearly describes what it does
- [ ] Function is 20 lines or fewer (guideline)
- [ ] 3 or fewer parameters
- [ ] No duplicate code (DRY)
- [ ] if nesting is 2 levels or fewer
- [ ] No magic numbers (extract as constants)
- [ ] Understandable without comments (self-documenting)Constraints
Mandatory Rules (MUST)
- Test first: Write tests before refactoring
- Small steps: Change one thing at a time
- Behavior preservation: No functional changes
Prohibited (MUST NOT)
- Multiple tasks simultaneously: No refactoring + feature addition at the same time
- Refactoring without tests: Risk of regression
Best practices
- Boy Scout Rule: Leave code cleaner than you found it
- Refactoring timing: Red-Green-Refactor (TDD)
- Incremental improvement: Consistency over perfection
- Behavior preservation: Refactoring involves no functional changes
- Small commits: Commit in focused units
Behavior Validation (Code Simplifier Integration)
Step A: Understand Current Behavior
Fully understand current behavior before refactoring:
## Behavior Analysis
### Inputs
- [list of input parameters]
- [types and constraints]
### Outputs
- [return values]
- [side effects]
### Invariants
- [conditions that must always be true]
- [edge cases]
### Dependencies
- [external dependencies]
- [state dependencies]Step B: Validate After Refactoring
# 1. Run tests
npm test -- --coverage
# 2. Type check
npx tsc --noEmit
# 3. Lint check
npm run lint
# 4. Compare with previous behavior (snapshot tests)
npm test -- --updateSnapshotStep C: Document Changes
## Refactoring Summary
### Changes Made
1. [Change 1]: [reason]
2. [Change 2]: [reason]
### Behavior Preserved
- [x] Same input → same output
- [x] Same side effects
- [x] Same error handling
### Risks & Follow-ups
- [potential risks]
- [follow-up tasks]
### Test Status
- [ ] Unit tests: passing
- [ ] Integration tests: passing
- [ ] E2E tests: passingTroubleshooting
Issue: Tests fail after refactor
Cause: Behavior change occurred Solution: Revert and isolate the change, then retry
Issue: Code still complex
Cause: Multiple responsibilities mixed in one function Solution: Extract into smaller units with clear boundaries
Issue: Performance regression
Cause: Inefficient abstraction introduced Solution: Profile and optimize the hot path
Multi-Agent Workflow
Validation & Retrospectives
- Round 1 (Orchestrator): Validate behavior preservation checklist
- Round 2 (Analyst): Complexity and duplication analysis
- Round 3 (Executor): Test or static analysis verification
Agent Roles
| Agent | Role |
| Claude | Refactoring plan, code transformation |
| Gemini | Large-scale codebase analysis, pattern detection |
| Codex | Test execution, build verification |
Workflow Example
# 1. Gemini: Codebase analysis
ask-gemini "@src/ extract list of high-complexity functions"
# 2. Claude: Refactoring plan and execution
# Work based on IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md
# 3. Codex: Verification
codex-cli shell "npm test && npm run lint"References
Metadata
Version
- Current Version: 1.0.0
- Last Updated: 2025-01-01
- Compatible Platforms: Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini
Related Skills
- code-review
- backend-testing
Tags
#refactoring #code-quality #DRY #SOLID #design-patterns #clean-code
Examples
Example 1: Basic usage
<!-- Add example content here -->Example 2: Advanced usage
<!-- Add advanced example content here -->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.

