「refactor」の検索結果

[omh] Decided cross-module refactor to phase: refactor planning - turn a decided boundary-changing refactor into a phased plan - reconnaissance, contracts-first phase order, per-phase verification and rollback, a files table, and an explicit approval gate before any edit. Use when the user says: refactor-plan, refactor plan, plan this refactor, plan the refactor, refactor planning, refactor phases, phased refactor, refactor in phases.

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。

Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), plan a multi-module restructure before executing it (use plan-a-change), map domain boundaries before restructuring along them (use ddd-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Run multiple Reforge-guided section-refactor lanes in parallel, each in its own worktree/branch off origin/main, with a score-blind adversarial review panel gating every commit, one draft PR per section. Use when the user wants to reduce Reforge surface/internal score across several sections at once via architecturally-correct deletions (dead surface, entity-leak removal, cross-section read-splits) — not by relocation, parameter bags, or accessibility-dodging. Wraps the per-lane process in .codex/skills/humans-refactor. Triggers: 'refactor swarm', 'parallel section refactors', 'run reforge refactor on Users/Tickets/...', 'burn down surface score across sections'. Has an intensity dial (light|standard|deep) and a workflow|solo execution mode to trade token burn against autonomy per unit of output.

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。

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

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.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

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.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

Practical UI refactoring and visual design review inspired by Refactoring UI by Steve Schoger and Adam Wathan. Use when an AI coding agent needs to improve an existing interface, audit visual polish, redesign a rough UI, review frontend code for hierarchy/spacing/typography/color/depth/image issues, or turn a plain implementation into a cleaner product-quality screen. Do not use for creating UI from scratch, scaffolding a new app, building a new landing page, or designing a new design system unless the user explicitly asks to review or refactor an existing interface.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

Cursorで任意のリファクタリング改善案を返すnative入口。共有refactor-advisorとrefactor-guidanceを読み、reviewerのVERDICTから分離する。

Control risky structural change by proving a refactor is necessary and that behaviour, contracts, data, security boundaries, and operational properties can be preserved through a staged migration. Use whenever the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, modernise, extract, migrate, rewrite, or re-architect existing code, or asks whether they should. Prefer this over starting the refactor. DO NOT REFACTOR is a first-class outcome. Part of the audit suite; inherits the shared constitution while its own job is proving necessity and behavioural preservation.

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。

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

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。

SKILL.mdを最も効率的に動作するよう整理するスキル。 7ステップのリファクタリング手順でスキルの実行効率・コンテキスト効率を最適化する。 Trigger: スキル整理, SKILL.md圧縮, スキルリファクタ, skill refactor, refactor skill

失敗するテストを先に実行し、最小限の実装で成功させてからコードを整理する開発手順を支援。網羅率80％以上の確認と検証結果の記録まで扱うスキル。

• テストから新機能を実装したいとき
• 不具合を再現してから直したいとき
• テストを保ちながらコードを整理

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。

Apply named refactoring transformations to improve code structure without changing behavior. Use when the user mentions "refactor this", "code smells", "extract method", "replace conditional", "technical debt", "move method", "inline variable", "decompose conditional", or "clean up this messy code". Also trigger when cleaning up legacy code, preparing code for new features by restructuring, or identifying which transformation fits a specific code smell. Covers smell-driven refactoring, safe transformation sequences, and testing guards. For code-quality foundations, see clean-code. For managing complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

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。

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.

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。

AI DevKit · Systematic structural or multi-file refactors across any stack while preserving behavior and public contracts. Use for reorganizing modules, boundaries, naming, APIs/contracts, staged refactor plans, or refactor risk 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。

Guides the red-green-refactor TDD workflow: write a failing test first, implement the minimum code to make it pass, then refactor while keeping tests green. Use when a user asks to practice TDD, write tests first, follow red-green-refactor, do test-driven development, write failing tests before code, or phrases like 'make the test pass', 'test coverage', or 'unit tests before implementation'.

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。

Tech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring roadmap — drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks about tech debt, refactoring priorities, what to clean up first, or asks "why is this so hard to change?", "what should we fix first?", or "how do I justify refactoring to management?". Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime — "health" in those contexts is infrastructure, not code quality. Also not for single-function refactoring questions.

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。