code-refinement
Included with Lifetime
$97 forever
Improves code quality across duplication, efficiency, and architectural fit. Use when code passes tests but quality is poor or before a major release.
code-qualityrefactoringclean-codealgorithmsduplicationanti-slopcraft
What this skill does
## Table of Contents - [Quick Start](#quick-start) - [When to Use](#when-to-use) - [Analysis Dimensions](#analysis-dimensions) - [Progressive Loading](#progressive-loading) - [Required TodoWrite Items](#required-todowrite-items) - [Workflow](#workflow) - [Tiered Analysis](#tiered-analysis) - [Cross-Plugin Dependencies](#cross-plugin-dependencies) # Code Refinement Workflow Analyze and improve living code quality across six dimensions. ## Quick Start ```bash /refine-code /refine-code --level 2 --focus duplication /refine-code --level 3 --report refinement-plan.md ``` ## When To Use - After rapid AI-assisted development sprints - Before major releases (quality gate) - When code "works but smells" - Refactoring existing modules for clarity - Reducing technical debt in living code ## When NOT To Use - Removing dead/unused code (use conserve:bloat-detector) ## Analysis Dimensions | # | Dimension | Module | What It Catches | |---|-----------|--------|----------------| | 1 | Duplication & Redundancy | `duplication-analysis` | Near-identical blocks, similar functions, copy-paste | | 2 | Algorithmic Efficiency | `algorithm-efficiency` | O(n^2) where O(n) works, unnecessary iterations | | 3 | Clean Code Violations | `clean-code-checks` | Long methods, deep nesting, poor naming, magic values | | 4 | Architectural Fit | `architectural-fit` | Paradigm mismatches, coupling violations, leaky abstractions | | 5 | Anti-Slop Patterns | `clean-code-checks` | Premature abstraction, enterprise cosplay, hollow patterns | | 6 | Error Handling | `clean-code-checks` | Bare excepts, swallowed errors, happy-path-only | | 7 | Additive Bias | `imbue:justify` | Workarounds over root fixes, test tampering, unnecessary additions | ## Plugin-Specific Patterns Detection patterns for plugin and skill codebases where standard code quality heuristics miss structural issues. ### Delegation Stub Bodies A skill that declares "delegates to X" but still carries the full template body is doing double duty. The delegating skill should be a thin wrapper (under 30 lines) that routes to the target. Flag any delegating skill whose body exceeds 50 lines. ### Module Explosion Flag skills with 10+ module files where 40% or more of content overlaps. Signal: two modules covering the same API surface from different angles (e.g., both describing the same config options or the same CLI flags). ### Oversized Single Modules Flag individual module files exceeding 500 lines as candidates for splitting or trimming. Large modules defeat progressive loading by forcing full-file reads for partial information. ### Dead Python References Skills referencing Python commands (`python -m module.name` or `python -c "from module import ..."`) where the referenced module does not exist in the plugin's `src/` directory. These are stale references to renamed or removed code. ## Progressive Loading Load modules based on refinement focus: - **`modules/duplication-analysis.md`** (~400 tokens): Duplication detection and consolidation - **`modules/algorithm-efficiency.md`** (~400 tokens): Complexity analysis and optimization - **`modules/clean-code-checks.md`** (~450 tokens): Clean code, anti-slop, error handling - **`modules/architectural-fit.md`** (~400 tokens): Paradigm alignment and coupling Load all for thorough refinement. For focused work, load only relevant modules. ## Required TodoWrite Items 1. `refine:context-established`: Scope, language, framework detection 2. `refine:scan-complete`: Findings across all dimensions 3. `refine:prioritized`: Findings ranked by impact and effort 4. `refine:plan-generated`: Concrete refactoring plan with before/after 5. `refine:evidence-captured`: Evidence appendix per `imbue:proof-of-work` 6. `refine:findings-verified`: Citations confirmed by `citation_verifier.py` 7. `refine:execution-complete`: All wave-listed candidates closed-or-rationale'd (only required when invocation includes "execute findings" or stronger; see Step 6) ## Workflow ### Step 1: Establish Context (`refine:context-established`) Detect project characteristics: ```bash # Language detection find . -not -path "*/.venv/*" -not -path "*/__pycache__/*" \ -not -path "*/node_modules/*" -not -path "*/.git/*" \ \( -name "*.py" -o -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.rs" -o -name "*.go" \) \ | head -20 # Framework detection ls package.json pyproject.toml Cargo.toml go.mod 2>/dev/null # Size assessment find . -not -path "*/.venv/*" -not -path "*/__pycache__/*" \ -not -path "*/node_modules/*" -not -path "*/.git/*" \ \( -name "*.py" -o -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.rs" \) \ | xargs wc -l 2>/dev/null | tail -1 ``` ### Step 2: Dimensional Scan (`refine:scan-complete`) Load relevant modules and execute analysis per tier level. For dimension 7 (Additive Bias), run `Skill(imbue:justify)` to compute the bias score, check Iron Law compliance, and flag unnecessary additions or workarounds. ### Step 3: Prioritize (`refine:prioritized`) Rank findings by: - **Impact**: How much quality improves (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW) - **Effort**: Lines changed, files touched (SMALL/MEDIUM/LARGE) - **Risk**: Likelihood of introducing bugs (LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH) Priority = HIGH impact + SMALL effort + LOW risk first. ### Step 4: Generate Plan (`refine:plan-generated`) For each finding, produce: - File path and line range - Anchor: verbatim source text at the cited line - Current code snippet - Proposed improvement - Rationale (which principle/dimension) - Estimated effort ### Step 5: Evidence Capture (`refine:evidence-captured`) Document with `imbue:proof-of-work` (if available): - `[E1]`, `[E2]` references for each finding - Metrics before/after where measurable - Principle violations cited **Fallback**: If `imbue` is not installed, capture evidence inline in the report using the same `[E1]` reference format without TodoWrite integration. ### Step 6: Execute Findings (`refine:execution-complete`) Steps 1-5 produce a **plan**. Steps 6 produces **closures**. Both are part of the skill. Execution does not stop at planning unless the user explicitly says "plan only". #### Execution mode detection Match the user's invocation phrasing against this table to determine execution scope: | User said | Mode | Stop when | |---|---|---| | `/code-refinement` (no qualifier) | **Plan only** | After Step 5 | | `--dry-run` or "just plan" | **Plan only** | After Step 5 | | "execute findings" / "apply fixes" | **Plan, execute Wave 1** | After all SMALL-effort, and LOW-risk findings closed | | "execute all findings" / "all phases" / "all waves" | **Plan and execute every wave** | After every finding (or every wave-listed candidate) is either closed by commit or has explicit per-item rationale in the synthesis | | "ignore scope guard" | **Override branch-size limits** | Branch metrics do not gate execution. Continue past RED zone. | | "do not stop until complete" / "until ALL ... complete" | **No mid-task summaries** | Only declare done when synthesis has every wave-listed candidate closed-or-rationale'd | The triggers compose: `--tier 3 --execute all findings --ignore-scope-guard` means run every Wave 2 and Wave 3 candidate to closure regardless of branch size. #### Completion gate (when execution mode is active) The task is **not complete** until ALL of the following hold: 1. **Wave 2 candidates** (medium-effort, listed in synthesis "Wave 2 Candidates" section): every entry has either a closure commit or an explicit per-item line in the synthesis stating why it is not viable. 2. **Wave 3 candidates** (large-effort, listed in synthesis "Wave 3 Candidates" section): same gate. Do not pre-emptively defer LARGE-effort items with generic "needs dedicated PR" rationale when the user said "execute all". Execute the mechanical ones (split-by-class, mixin-package, module-merge) and reserve "deferred" only for items requiring architecture-level decisions (schema changes, new dependency declarations, new venv layouts). 3. **Synthesis updated**: `docs
Related in code-quality
uncle-bob-craft
IncludedUse when performing code review, writing or refactoring code, or discussing architecture; complements clean-code and does not replace project linter/formatter.
code-quality
performance-review
IncludedDetects time and space complexity hotspots via AST scan. Use when code feels slow, before performance-sensitive merges, or to find O(n²) regressions.
code-quality
safety-critical-patterns
IncludedApplies NASA Power of 10 rules for safety-critical verifiable code. Use when auditing financial, medical, or high-reliability system code.
code-quality