本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

distill

Cut the branch down to what the code cannot say: reuse what exists, remove duplication, dead code, and wasted work, turn invariants into asserts, and delete the comments the code already speaks. Run it after answering review feedback too — a fix written to satisfy a reviewer is the least distilled code on the branch.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wadoスター 119(GitHub 119 + cccskills 0)

実行スコア 未検証

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.8 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Distill

Scope

B=$(git merge-base origin/main HEAD)
scripts/changed-sources.sh              # the files, one per line
git diff "$B" --stat -- $(scripts/changed-sources.sh)
git diff "$B" -- $(scripts/changed-sources.sh)

Every file that reports, whatever its type, plus any doc it made stale. Whatever you notice on the way in is in scope too, pre-existing or not. A WEP keeps the sections docs/AGENTS.md requires.

Generated files are the one exclusion, and the script is what applies it: .gitattributes marks them linguist-generated, so a new generated path is excluded the moment it is marked and nothing here lists paths a second time. A plain git diff buries the branch under them — on a generator change they outnumber the sources five to one. Read the sources; regenerate the rest.

This is the scope on every run. Distilling again means the whole branch again, never the diff since the last distill: an earlier pass is not a clean bill, and what the code between the two commits made stale is spread across everything the branch touched.

Answering review feedback is one of the times to run it. Such a fix is written to satisfy a reviewer rather than to fit the code, so it arrives with the reviewer's framing in its comments, an explanation of the bug beside the fix, and often a helper the codebase already had.

Rules

Distilling keeps what the code does. The only change of behaviour it makes is a bug fix, and a bug fix starts from a failing test.

Code

  • Reuse: don't re-implement what the codebase already has. Grep the shared modules and the files next to the change, and call the existing helper.
  • Duplication: one behaviour, one implementation. Hoist the shared part of near-copies behind the difference — a parameter, a closure, an enum. Don't abstract a single use.
  • Altitude: a special case layered on shared infrastructure means the fix sits too shallow. Generalize the mechanism instead.
  • Dead code: delete what the change left behind.
  • Efficiency: cut wasted work — recomputation, repeated I/O, independent work run in sequence. A stored closure pins everything it captured; prefer a struct holding only the fields it needs.
  • Contracts, not defences: a function states what it requires and trusts its callers. Defensive programming is banned. A default or a fallback whose validity you cannot argue is the smell. It turns a broken call into a wrong answer that no test will catch. Write assert! for what the caller owes and unreachable! for the arm that cannot happen, and say which caller establishes it where that is not obvious. A branch that genuinely can happen is control flow and stays; the ban is on inventing an answer for a case you have not shown to be reachable.

Comments

Apply AGENTS.md § General Rules to every comment in scope. A comment saying what the code does is a rename or a decomposition to make. A comment stating an invariant is an assert to write. A comment that carries no information is deleted outright.

Markdown

Apply the markdown skill to every Markdown file in scope.

In an instruction file (an AGENTS.md, a skill), also cut a rule that is trivially deduced from a principle the file or the root AGENTS.md already states: detail dilutes the rules that matter. Keep one that fences a principle against a reading broader than intended.

Cut words, never a fact. A measurement, a name to grep for (a pass, a type, a function), a condition or an exception, and the bug behind a rule are facts, not detail. Before removing a passage, grep for what links to it. Keep a code block runnable on its own: every name it uses defined in it, every command and path real. Run only a block without side effects to check it.

Sweep by shape

A copy does not share a name, so grepping the name finds nothing.

For every predicate or helper the branch adds or moves, grep the tree for what its body looks like rather than what it is called. Two or three tokens of the body carry further than a signature.

Finish the sweep in the same pass. Fixing the sites a reviewer named and calling it a class fix leaves the rest standing, and the next review returns them one at a time.

Cycle

Three passes over that scope; surviving one is no exemption. Stop when a pass finds nothing to cut.

Finish

mise run format

Code edits: run the tests covering what you touched (mise run test, mise run test-wado). Comment, doc, and Markdown edits alone need only mise run check, which holds the specification's examples to their fixtures.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

コメント

ログインなしで書き込めます。使ってみた感想、質問、動かなかった環境などを気軽にどうぞ。

まだコメントはありません。最初のコメントを書いてみませんか。

送信するとすぐに公開されます。メールアドレスや電話番号などの個人情報は書かないでください。URL は 2 つまでです。

0 / 1000 文字

このフォームは reCAPTCHA で保護されており、Google のプライバシーポリシーと利用規約が適用されます。

同じリポジトリのスキル

benchmark

無料

Measure Wado's performance or the size of the Wasm it generates, and refresh the benchmark/ and wasm-size/ README files. Use for any benchmarking or size-measurement request, whichever benchmark it names.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

ci-timing

無料

Measure how long GitHub Actions jobs and steps took across past runs, and find the pull request that made CI slower. Use for any question about CI duration, a slow job, or when CI got slow.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

How to answer code review feedback — a human reviewer, CodeRabbit, or any review bot. Verify the findings, report the classes they are instances of to the user before fixing, then fix the class rather than the sites named. Put design decisions to the user, then run /distill. Invoke when responding to review comments on a pull request, or to the findings of a /code-review run.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

Investigate and improve code coverage for the wado-compiler crate. Use for any question about what the tests do and do not reach, dead code included.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

cr

無料

Review the branch with /code-review at high, then answer the findings with /code-review-response.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

debugger

無料

Use rust-gdb to inspect variables and step through code without modifying it. Prefer it over print debugging for any investigation into what the compiler is actually doing (lldb is unavailable on Claude Code Web).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

wado-lang/wado1192026年10月26日 更新

wado-lang のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する