本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

code-necromancer

Systematic framework for resurrecting and modernizing legacy codebases through archaeology, resurrection, and rejuvenation phases. Activate on "legacy code", "inherited codebase", "no documentation", "technical debt", "resurrect", "modernize". NOT for greenfield projects or well-documented active codebases.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(15)

  • SKILL.md6.2 KB
  • CHANGELOG.md1.1 KB
  • references/archaeology-guide.md7.3 KB
  • references/dependency-patterns.md5.4 KB
  • references/framework-detection.md5.9 KB
  • references/INDEX.md601 B
  • references/infrastructure-mapping.md5.7 KB
  • references/integration-test-patterns.md7.9 KB
  • scripts/analyze-repo.sh12.1 KB
  • scripts/INDEX.md288 B
  • scripts/scan-repos.sh6.0 KB
  • templates/archaeology-report.md6.2 KB
  • templates/INDEX.md417 B
  • templates/repo-inventory.json2.6 KB
  • templates/resurrection-plan.md5.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Code Necromancer

Tagline: Raise dead codebases from the grave

Systematic framework for understanding, resurrecting, and modernizing legacy codebases.

When to Activate

✅ Use when:

  • Inheriting a codebase with 5+ repos and no documentation
  • Resurrecting a product dormant for 2+ years
  • Joining a company with significant technical debt and tribal knowledge loss
  • Performing due diligence on acquired codebases
  • Modernizing legacy systems without breaking existing functionality

❌ NOT for:

  • Greenfield projects (start fresh instead)
  • Well-documented active codebases
  • Simple bug fixes in maintained systems

The Three Phases

Phase 1: ARCHAEOLOGY

Objective: Create a complete map before touching anything.

OutputDescription
repo-inventory.jsonAll repos with metadata, languages, activity
dependency-graph.mmdInter-repo and external dependencies
architecture-diagram.mmdVisual system topology
tech-stack-matrix.mdLanguage/framework versions per repo
maturity-assessment.mdCode quality, test coverage, docs quality
missing-pieces.mdGaps, orphaned repos, broken integrations

Process: Inventory → Deep Scan → Cross-Reference → Visualize → Assess

→ See references/archaeology-guide.md for detailed techniques.

Phase 2: RESURRECTION

Objective: Get the system running in development.

OutputDescription
dependency-audit.mdOutdated packages, vulnerabilities, breaking changes
environment-variables.mdAll required env vars with defaults
secrets-needed.mdAPI keys, certs, OAuth credentials
infrastructure-status.mdCloud resources, what exists vs deleted
resurrection-blockers.mdCritical issues preventing launch
integration-tests/Tests verifying components work and communicate

Process: Audit Dependencies → Map Environment → Check Infrastructure → Write Tests → Document Blockers

→ See references/integration-test-patterns.md for resurrection test patterns.

Phase 3: REJUVENATION

Objective: Modernize while maintaining feature parity.

OutputDescription
security-recommendations.mdVulnerability fixes, compliance
modernization-roadmap.mdPrioritized upgrades with effort estimates
architecture-improvements.mdScalability, performance, maintainability

Process: Security First → Infrastructure (containerize, CI/CD) → Code Quality → Architecture

Key Commands

# List all repos in org
gh repo list ORG --limit 1000 --json name,primaryLanguage,pushedAt

# Dependency analysis
npm audit && npm outdated      # Node.js
pip list --outdated && safety check  # Python
go mod graph                    # Go

# Find env vars in code
grep -rn 'process\.env\|os\.environ' --include="*.js" --include="*.py"

→ See references/framework-detection.md for framework/stack identification. → See references/infrastructure-mapping.md for cloud resource discovery. → See references/dependency-patterns.md for dependency detection.

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

1. Premature Resurrection

What it looks like: Running npm install before reading any code Why it's wrong: You'll fix the same bug 5 times; dependencies have changed Fix: Complete archaeology first; understand before touching

2. Scope Creep

What it looks like: "Let's also refactor while we're here" Why it's wrong: Scope explosion; never actually resurrect Fix: Strict phase separation; refactoring is Phase 3

3. Big Bang Updates

What it looks like: Update all dependencies in one commit Why it's wrong: Something breaks, no idea what Fix: Update incrementally; test after each

4. Ignoring Tests

What it looks like: "It runs, ship it" Why it's wrong: Regression city; no baseline for changes Fix: Write resurrection tests as you go; they prove progress

5. Undocumented Changes

What it looks like: "I fixed it but forgot what I changed" Why it's wrong: Tribal knowledge returns; next person is you in 6 months Fix: Document everything you learn and change

6. Trusting Old Documentation

What it looks like: Following README from 2019 Why it's wrong: APIs change, services get deprecated Fix: Verify every instruction; documentation lies

Success Metrics

Archaeology Complete When:

  • All repos cataloged with metadata
  • Dependency graph visualized
  • Architecture diagram created
  • Core vs peripheral repos identified
  • Missing pieces documented

Resurrection Complete When:

  • All services start locally
  • Services can communicate with each other
  • Integration tests pass
  • At least one full user flow works

Rejuvenation Complete When:

  • No critical security vulnerabilities
  • All dependencies reasonably current
  • CI/CD pipeline working
  • Documentation current
  • Team can develop new features

References

→ references/archaeology-guide.md - Deep code archaeology techniques → references/dependency-patterns.md - Dependency detection across ecosystems → references/framework-detection.md - Framework/stack identification → references/infrastructure-mapping.md - Cloud resource discovery → references/integration-test-patterns.md - Resurrection test patterns

Templates

→ templates/repo-inventory.json - Repository catalog → templates/archaeology-report.md - Phase 1 output → templates/resurrection-plan.md - Phase 2 output → templates/rejuvenation-roadmap.md - Phase 3 output

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Expert in 2000s-era music visualization (Milkdrop, AVS, Geiss) and modern WebGL implementations. Specializes in Butterchurn integration, Web Audio API AnalyserNode FFT data, GLSL shaders for audio-reactive visuals, and psychedelic generative art. Activate on "Milkdrop", "music visualization", "WebGL visualizer", "Butterchurn", "audio reactive", "FFT visualization", "spectrum analyzer". NOT for simple bar charts/waveforms (use basic canvas), video editing, or non-audio visuals.

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

Expert legal research agent for finding and scraping expungement data state by state. Knows authoritative sources, URL patterns, Firecrawl configuration, and 2026 legal landscape.

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

Expert in 3D computer vision labeling tools, workflows, and AI-assisted annotation for LiDAR, point clouds, and sensor fusion. Covers SAM4D/Point-SAM, human-in-the-loop architectures, and vertical-specific training strategies. Activate on '3D labeling', 'point cloud annotation', 'LiDAR labeling', 'SAM 3D', 'SAM4D', 'sensor fusion annotation', '3D bounding box', 'semantic segmentation point cloud'. NOT for 2D image labeling (use clip-aware-embeddings), general ML training (use ml-engineer), video annotation without 3D (use computer-vision-pipeline), or VLM prompt engineering (use prompt-engineer).

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

Apply crisis decision-making research to agent routing, uncertainty triage, and coordination failure analysis in time-pressured systems. Use when diagnosing handoff failures, analytical paralysis, or expert judgment under incomplete information. NOT for routine coding, simple CRUD design, or static single-agent tasks with complete information.

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

Use for insight, reframing, contradiction, impasse, and anomaly-driven problem solving when execution effort no longer helps. NOT for routine optimization, error correction, or well-specified tasks with known solution paths.

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

Apply cognitive task analysis to expert work that depends on perceptual cues, branching judgment, and recurring monitoring loops. Use when decomposing expert capability into agent structure, simulation design, or validation interviews. NOT for ordinary step-by-step SOP capture or simple pipelines with no tacit cue layer.

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。

curiositech/port-daddy22026年10月8日 更新

curiositech のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する