902 个 · 按相关度排序
Find business logic repeated across software components, such as notifications, auditing, and validation. Compare responsibilities and dependencies, then recommend a shared service, shared library, or component merger with a prioritized consolidation plan.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Analyze files or modules for duplicated code, excessive complexity, and violations of SOLID, five software design principles. Get prioritized refactoring suggestions with affected locations, risks, estimated effort, and testing needs to guide code improvements.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Save the current code state in a local Git commit before risky changes, then return to that checkpoint if needed. Useful for multi-file refactoring and trying another approach after an unsuccessful edit.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Check code for complex logic, duplication, naming issues, and oversized functions. Get a quality report with file locations and severity levels, plus guidance on splitting complex code and extracting shared logic during reviews or after refactoring.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Analyze code changes to identify affected modules and check whether documentation and tests were updated alongside them. Produce a report on change size, documentation status, and missing updates before committing or after design changes and refactoring.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Supports development with code quality and security checks, change impact analysis, documentation templates, and coordination across multiple agents. It defines checkpoints for new modules and refactoring, plus roles and file ownership rules for parallel work.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Safely refactors C#/.NET code without changing behavior. USE FOR any request to refactor, rename, move, extract, inline, merge, consolidate, deduplicate, split, or modernize C# code, including partial/generated declarations, wrappers, public APIs, serialization/reflection/configuration names, friend assemblies, conditional compilation, and multi-targeted projects. Also use when a request calls a feature, bug fix, package/framework upgrade, or public nullability change a refactor and the behavior-changing part must be separated or declined. DO NOT USE FOR ordinary feature or bug fixes not presented as refactoring; standalone upgrades after reclassification (use dotnet-upgrade); adding tests; or formatting-only work.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Activation requires either supplied .NET coverage reports/percentages/line, branch, or condition metrics, or an explicit request to collect .NET coverage for analysis. USE FOR: interpreting that evidence, including Cobertura data, partial conditions, plateaus, target arithmetic, project-wide coverage-backed CRAP, and coverage-backed refactoring safety. Analyze supplied reports directly without rerunning tests or installing tools. DO NOT USE FOR: requests with neither coverage evidence nor explicit coverage-collection intent, including hypothetical change-survival questions (use test-gap-analysis); CRAP or refactoring safety for one named target (use crap-score); or requests owned by test-tagging, find-untested-sources, test-anti-patterns, run-tests, or code-testing.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Golang refactoring — safe, at-scale restructuring of existing Go code: a coverage-adaptive safety net, behavior-preserving transforms (gopls Rename/Extract, `gofmt -r`, `gopatch`), the Fowler catalog mapped to Go, breaking import cycles, and small stacked PRs. Apply when a function or type has grown too large, a code smell blocks a feature, or the user asks to refactor Go code — also for renaming at scale, extracting functions or interfaces, moving code between packages, or planning a multi-step refactor. Target styles owned elsewhere → See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-naming` (renames), `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-project-layout` (splits), `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-modernize` (idioms), `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-code-style` (control flow), `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-design-patterns` (patterns/DI).
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Apply Martin Fowler-inspired refactoring rules when improving existing code structure while preserving observable behavior.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Safely change and test untested codebases using Feathers' "Working Effectively with Legacy Code". Use when the user mentions "legacy code", "no tests", "untested codebase", "how do I test this", "seams", "characterization tests", "golden master", "sprout method", "afraid to change this code", "monster method", "dependency breaking", or "inherited a messy codebase". Also trigger when changing code without tests safely, getting a class under test when constructors, statics, or singletons block it, adding features to tangled modules, or planning incremental test coverage for an old codebase. Covers the legacy-code change algorithm, seams, characterization tests, sprout/wrap, and dependency-breaking techniques. For refactoring code that already has tests, see refactoring-patterns. For day-to-day code quality, see clean-code.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Apply meta-principles of software craftsmanship: DRY, orthogonality, tracer bullets, and design by contract. Use when the user mentions "best practices", "pragmatic approach", "broken windows", "tracer bullet", "software craftsmanship", "avoid technical debt", "code ownership", or "how do I become a better developer". Also trigger when evaluating build-vs-buy decisions, designing estimation approaches, or choosing between reversible and irreversible architectural decisions. Covers estimation, domain languages, and reversibility. For code-level quality, see clean-code. For refactoring techniques, see refactoring-patterns.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Write readable, maintainable code through disciplined naming, small functions, and clean error handling. Use when the user mentions "clean up this code", "this function is too long", "code smells", "naming conventions", "boy scout rule", "single responsibility", or "unit test quality". Also trigger when reviewing a pull request for readability, untangling a messy function, debating comment styles, or improving error-handling patterns. Covers SRP, comment discipline, formatting, and unit testing. For refactoring techniques, see refactoring-patterns. For architecture and dependency rules, see clean-architecture.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Guided journey from a working-but-untested vibe-coded prototype to a production-ready product with tests, clean structure, a business-rules boundary, and resilience at scale. Orchestrates nine skills phase by phase - working-with-legacy-code, clean-code, refactoring-patterns, software-design-philosophy, clean-architecture, pragmatic-programmer, release-it, system-design, ddia-systems - asking the user questions at every decision point and recording results in the project docs/ folder (TESTING.md, TECH-DEBT.md, IMPROVE-CODE-QUALITY-PLAN.md) so the journey resumes across sessions. Use when the user wants to harden an AI-generated prototype, add tests before refactoring, make code safe to change, or says 'this works on my machine but I am scared to touch it'. For an aged codebase, remove-technical-debt; for greenfield structure, design-code-architecture; for a product and UX pass, improve-app; to optimize speed and structure, architecture-optimization. For one framework in isolation, invoke that skill directly.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
You are a code refactoring expert specializing in clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, and modern software engineering best practices. Analyze and refactor the provided code to improve its quality, maintainability, and performance.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
**UTILITY SKILL** - Explain code snippets, functions, and algorithms in plain language. USE FOR: explain code, what does this code do, break down this function, help me understand this, walk through this algorithm, clarify this logic, explain this snippet, describe what happens here. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new code (use code generation), fixing bugs (use debugging), refactoring (use refactoring skills), code review with action items. INVOKES: file reading tools to access code, language detection for tailored explanations. FOR SINGLE OPERATIONS: If the user just needs to see file contents, use file reading tools directly.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Generates tests that capture current behavior of existing code before refactoring. Use when you need a safety net before AI-assisted refactoring or modifying legacy code.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Detailed refactoring mechanics with step-by-step procedures, and test code smell catalog with detection patterns and before/after examples
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
DDD-guided legacy refactoring patterns -- strangler fig, bubble context, ACL migration, 14 tactical/strategic/infrastructure patterns, and incremental monolith-to-microservices methodology
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Activation requires either supplied .NET coverage reports/percentages/line, branch, or condition metrics, or an explicit request to collect .NET coverage for analysis. USE FOR: interpreting that evidence, including Cobertura data, partial conditions, plateaus, target arithmetic, project-wide coverage-backed CRAP, and coverage-backed refactoring safety. Analyze supplied reports directly without rerunning tests or installing tools. DO NOT USE FOR: requests with neither coverage evidence nor explicit coverage-collection intent, including hypothetical change-survival questions (use test-gap-analysis); CRAP or refactoring safety for one named target (use crap-score); or requests owned by test-tagging, find-untested-sources, test-anti-patterns, run-tests, or code-testing.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Safely refactors C#/.NET code without changing behavior. USE FOR any request to refactor, rename, move, extract, inline, merge, consolidate, deduplicate, split, or modernize C# code, including partial/generated declarations, wrappers, public APIs, serialization/reflection/configuration names, friend assemblies, conditional compilation, and multi-targeted projects. Also use when a request calls a feature, bug fix, package/framework upgrade, or public nullability change a refactor and the behavior-changing part must be separated or declined. DO NOT USE FOR ordinary feature or bug fixes not presented as refactoring; standalone upgrades after reclassification (use dotnet-upgrade); adding tests; or formatting-only work.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when Java design, refactoring, or implementation tradeoffs should be evaluated with Kent Beck's simple design rules, including passes the tests, reveals intention, has no duplication, and has the fewest elements. This should trigger for requests such as Apply simple design rules; Review this design with Beck's rules; Choose between these refactoring options; Keep this Java design simple. Part of Plinth Toolkit
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
This skill should be used when working with CSS, creating components, styling elements, refactoring styles, or reviewing CSS code. Triggers on "CSS", "styles", "Tailwind", "dark mode", "component styling", "semantic class", "@apply", "stylesheet". Routes to specialized sub-skills for creation, validation, or refactoring.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Identify design quality issues in code including high coupling, low cohesion, God classes, long methods, and other code smells. Use when: (1) Reviewing code architecture and design quality, (2) Identifying refactoring opportunities, (3) Detecting God classes or classes with too many responsibilities, (4) Finding high coupling or low cohesion issues, (5) Analyzing code maintainability and technical debt. Detects coupling smells, cohesion problems, complexity issues, size violations, and encapsulation problems with actionable refactoring suggestions.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。