codebase-cleanup-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 quality, maintainability, and performance.
26
17%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/codebase-cleanup-refactor-clean/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
14%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 reads more like a system prompt persona definition ('You are a code refactoring expert') than a skill description. It uses first/second person framing, lacks concrete actions, has no 'Use when...' clause, and is too generic to be distinguishable from other code-related skills. The buzzword-heavy language ('clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, modern software engineering best practices') adds little discriminative value.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'refactor', 'code smell', 'technical debt', 'simplify', 'clean up code', 'SOLID principles', 'extract method'.
Replace vague language with specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Extracts methods, renames variables, splits large classes, removes code duplication, reduces cyclomatic complexity, and applies SOLID principles.'
Rewrite in third person voice ('Analyzes and refactors code...') instead of the current persona-style framing ('You are a code refactoring expert').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'improve its quality, maintainability, and performance' and 'clean code principles, SOLID design patterns.' It does not list concrete actions like 'extract methods, rename variables, reduce cyclomatic complexity, split classes.' The actions 'analyze and refactor' are very broad. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description addresses 'what' only vaguely (analyze and refactor code) and completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also weak, so this scores a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'refactoring', 'SOLID', 'clean code', and 'design patterns' that users might mention. However, it misses common natural terms like 'simplify code', 'reduce complexity', 'code smell', 'technical debt', 'DRY', or 'extract method'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is extremely generic and would conflict with any code review, code improvement, code optimization, or general coding assistance skill. 'Analyze and refactor code' could overlap with nearly any programming-related skill. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
20%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads as a generic template with boilerplate sections rather than a focused, actionable guide. It lacks any concrete code examples, specific refactoring patterns, or executable guidance—everything is described at an abstract level that Claude already understands. The referenced `implementation-playbook.md` is not provided, leaving the skill hollow.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code examples showing specific refactoring patterns (e.g., extract method, replace conditional with polymorphism) with before/after code snippets.
Remove boilerplate sections that Claude already knows (Context restating the description, generic Limitations, 'Use/Do not use' meta-guidance) to improve conciseness.
Add explicit validation checkpoints with concrete commands (e.g., 'Run existing test suite before and after each refactoring step: `pytest --tb=short`') to create proper feedback loops.
Provide the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` bundle file, or inline the most critical patterns directly in the skill if the bundle is unavailable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is verbose and explains things Claude already knows. The 'Context' section restates the description, 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections are meta-guidance Claude doesn't need, and the instructions are vague platitudes ('focus on readability and stability') rather than novel information. The boilerplate 'Limitations' section adds no value. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no concrete code examples, no specific refactoring patterns, no executable commands, and no copy-paste ready guidance. Instructions like 'Identify high-impact refactor candidates' and 'Apply changes with a focus on readability and stability' are abstract descriptions rather than actionable steps. The '$ARGUMENTS' placeholder adds nothing. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a rough sequence (identify → break into steps → apply → validate), and the output format provides some structure. However, validation steps are vague ('targeted regression checks') with no concrete commands or feedback loops for error recovery. For a refactoring skill involving potentially destructive changes, the lack of explicit validation checkpoints is a gap. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references `resources/implementation-playbook.md` for detailed patterns, which is appropriate progressive disclosure. However, no bundle files are provided, so the reference is unverifiable and potentially broken. The main content itself could benefit from better structural organization separating quick-reference patterns from the workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%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 | |
- Repository
- sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
- Commit
f5dc9e3
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.