「behavior-preserving」の検索結果

コードの動作を保ちながら、重複削除やモジュール分割で構造を整えるスキル。変更前と各段階のテスト、計画の承認、レビュー、コミット前の確認まで進行を管理します。

• 動作を変えずにモジュールを分割したいとき
• 重複コードや不要コードの削除
• 入れ子の削減と名前の整理

Load the body before the first implementation edit for a bug fix or behavior change, or when the user or governing specification makes reusable tests a deliverable. It keeps the smallest focused test with the delivered project and updates coverage when behavior changes. Do not load for greenfield work unless reusable tests are explicitly required, behavior-preserving refactors, verification-only work, plan/review/explanation/documentation/formatting/generated-output-only work, explicit no-change or no-tool work, or when the user declines tests.

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。

Review or de-slop concrete changes in ccch1mneyyy/dsh-TUI at maintainer level: PR numbers or URLs, branches, commit ranges, patch files, staged or unstaged worktrees, and scoped repository-hygiene requests. Use for evidence-first correctness, contract, repository-rule, process, and behavior-preserving cleanup review, including debug residue, dead or duplicate code, speculative abstractions, stale comments or tests, and unrelated diff churn. Do not use for abstract designs with no concrete repository artifact; use audit for repository-wide assessments and vuln-check for security-only checks.

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。

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).

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。

[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.

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。

[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.

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。

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.

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。

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

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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).

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。

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).

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。

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.

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。