code-refactoring-refactor-clean

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...

Install with Tessl CLI

npx tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill code-refactoring-refactor-clean

What are skills?

1.00x

Quality

37%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

92%

1.00x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/code-refactoring-refactor-clean/SKILL.md

SKILL.md

Review

Evals

Discovery

32%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This description is incomplete (truncated mid-sentence) and uses incorrect voice ('You are' instead of third person). While it identifies the refactoring domain and mentions relevant concepts like SOLID and clean code, it lacks explicit trigger guidance and specific concrete actions, making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over others.

Suggestions

Complete the truncated description and add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'refactor', 'clean up code', 'improve code quality', 'technical debt', 'code smell'

Rewrite in third person voice (e.g., 'Analyzes and refactors code to improve...' instead of 'You are a code refactoring expert...')

List specific concrete actions such as 'extract methods, reduce cyclomatic complexity, apply SOLID principles, improve naming conventions, eliminate code duplication'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (code refactoring) and mentions some concepts (clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, modern software engineering best practices), but the description is truncated and doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'extract methods', 'reduce complexity', or 'improve naming'.	2 / 3
Completeness	The description is truncated ('improve its...') and lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance. It partially addresses 'what' but completely fails to address 'when' Claude should select this skill.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Contains some relevant keywords like 'refactoring', 'clean code', 'SOLID', but misses common user terms like 'improve code', 'code smell', 'technical debt', 'code review', or 'optimize'. Also uses second person 'You are' which violates voice guidelines.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	While 'refactoring' and 'SOLID' provide some specificity, the broad terms 'code' and 'software engineering best practices' could overlap with general coding assistance, code review, or architecture skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

42%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill provides reasonable structure and appropriate progressive disclosure to external resources, but suffers from lack of actionable, concrete guidance. The instructions are abstract descriptions of what to do rather than executable steps with examples. The workflow mentions testing but doesn't integrate validation as explicit checkpoints.

Suggestions

Add concrete code examples showing before/after refactoring patterns (e.g., extract method, dependency injection) to make the skill actionable

Include explicit validation checkpoints in the workflow, such as 'Run tests after each step; only proceed if green'

Remove the 'Context' section as it restates information already conveyed by the title and instructions

Replace vague instructions like 'Assess code smells' with specific techniques or checklists (e.g., 'Check for: methods >20 lines, classes with >5 dependencies, duplicated logic')

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary framing ('You are a code refactoring expert...') and the 'Context' section restates what's already clear from the title and instructions.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides only vague, abstract guidance ('Assess code smells', 'Apply changes in small slices') with no concrete code examples, specific commands, or executable patterns. Describes rather than instructs.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are listed in a logical sequence but lack explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. 'Update tests and verify regressions' is mentioned but not integrated as a gate between steps.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Appropriately structured with a clear overview and well-signaled reference to external resource (implementation-playbook.md) for detailed patterns. Content is not monolithic and navigation is clear.	3 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Reviewed: about 18 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.