24 个 · 按相关度排序
Review concrete code changes for defects, compatibility problems, repository-rule violations, and unnecessary code. Produce evidence-based findings and, when explicitly requested, make minimal cleanup changes while checking that existing behavior is preserved.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Coordinate code refactoring, restructuring code while preserving its behavior. Check existing tests before changes, work in small steps, review the result, and pause for approval of the plan and before committing.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Add or update a focused, reusable test when fixing bugs or changing behavior. Keep it in the project's existing test structure, verify the relevant change, and maintain coverage as the expected behavior evolves.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Evaluate Vitest tests by the observable behavior and realistic regressions they protect. Guide new test authoring and review existing suites for duplication, dependence on implementation details, and code used only by tests, with evidence for retention or removal.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
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。
[omh] Oversized or tangled UI component: behavior-preserving refactor of UI code - preview the full change plan first, apply as a second explicit step, and work impact-ordered from state architecture down to naming polish. Use when the user says: frontend-refactor, front-refactor, frontend refactor, refactor this component, refactor the component, refactor my component, component refactor, react refactor.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[omh] Messy or AI-generated code to clean up: delete AI-generated slop, dead code, and duplication while observable behavior stays identical. Use when the user says: ai-slop-cleaner, cleanup, deslop, refactor, risky, behavior-preserving refactor, risk analysis, refactor workflow.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when the user asks to review or clean up R code for tidyverse style, standardize formatting or names, remove redundant comments or wrappers, or make a behavior-preserving style pass. Also use when writing substantial new R package code if the user requests tidyverse style or the package already follows it. Not for routine small edits or general correctness, security, or test-quality reviews.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when a complex or risky code change should be split into Kent Beck's two-step method by first making the change easy through behavior-preserving preparatory refactoring, then making the intended behavior change once the design supports it. This should trigger for requests such as Apply two-step change; Make this risky change safer; Refactor before changing behavior; Separate preparation from behavior change. Part of Plinth Toolkit
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Review pytest test effectiveness against authoritative contracts, relevant faults, behavior-preserving refactors, realistic boundaries, isolation, and diagnostics. Use for test-quality audits, coverage-gap reviews, regression-test changes, or mocking reviews; preserve existing project gates rather than inventing coverage targets.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on behavior/data ownership, statement placement, loops, or dead-code knowledge, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when implementing new observable frontend behavior or fixing a behavior-changing bug where a failing test can describe the missing or incorrect behavior first. Apply to components, hooks/composables, utilities, API clients, route guards, or user workflows; pure behavior-preserving refactoring uses an already-green contract instead.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on record, collection, value, responsibility, delegation, or algorithm boundaries, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on variable meaning, field naming, derived state, or reference/value identity, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on conditional complexity, repeated branches, guards, special cases, or internal invariants, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when selecting or composing behavior-preserving refactoring techniques after structural evidence is known, especially when multiple candidate transformations, preconditions, or ordering choices must be compared.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on function API shape, flags, dependencies, mutability, construction, or command/function trade-offs, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on legacy OO hierarchies, subtype responsibilities, superclass extraction/collapse, or delegation, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when behavior-preserving frontend refactoring focuses on function structure, naming, parameters, shared context, or phase boundaries, and the selected technique needs family-specific mechanics, risks, and JavaScript/TypeScript/React/Vue adaptation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Post-implementation simplification pass. Reduces complexity without changing behavior. Use after Phase 3 (Build GREEN) and before Phase 4 (Review). Catches dead code, unnecessary abstractions, over-engineering, and redundant patterns. Triggers on "simplify", "clean up", "reduce complexity", "too complex". NOT for style/convention enforcement (see mk:clean-code); NOT for reviewing diffs or PRs (see mk:review).
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Enforces KISS/DRY/YAGNI during authoring and ad-hoc quality reviews. Pragmatic standards: concise, direct, no unnecessary comments. NOT for post-hoc diff/PR review (see mk:review); NOT for behavior-preserving simplification passes (see mk:simplify).
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Load for behavior-preserving rename, move, decomposition, dead-code removal, dependency cleanup, record/class conversion, or immutable contract migration that needs caller, flow, test, and impact analysis; not for feature work or one-line cleanup.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Analyze a completed phase diff for high-confidence behavior-preserving simplifications and apply only explicitly approved proposals. Use after execution and before review to reduce duplication, dead code, needless complexity, or avoidable inefficiency.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Simplify a bounded code area when the user explicitly requests behavior-preserving refactoring or a named complexity/readability problem is the accepted task; do not trigger automatically after implementation, during every review, for adjacent cleanup, or when behavior may change.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。