brainstorm
Runs a structured design conversation — clarifies intent, proposes 2-3 approaches with trade-offs, iterates the design — and writes a user-approved engineering…
Refactors code toward project-guideline compliance and testability (so /optimus:unit-test can safely increase coverage) across four analysis lenses, fanned out to parallel agents when the scope warrants it. Supports "testability" or "guidelines" focus plus flexible scoping.
$ npx -y skills add oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude --skill refactor --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/refactorContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Refactors code toward project-guideline compliance and testability (so /optimus:unit-test can safely increase coverage) across four analysis lenses, fanned out to parallel agents when the scope warrants it. Supports "testability" or "guidelines" focus plus flexible scoping.
description: Refactors code toward project-guideline compliance and testability (so /optimus:unit-test can safely increase coverage) across four analysis lenses, fanned out to parallel agents when the scope warrants it. Supports "testability" or "guidelines" focus plus flexible scoping. Read-only until the user approves the plan; applied changes stay local. Use after /optimus:init, before /optimus:unit-test, or for an iterative loop /optimus:deep refactor. disable-model-invocation: true argument-hint: "[testability|guidelines] [scope]"
Analyze existing source code against the project's own guidelines across four lenses — inline for a small scope, fanned out to parallel agents otherwise — present a prioritized refactoring plan, then apply only user-approved changes with test verification. Two goals:
1. **Guideline compliance** — align code with coding-guidelines.md, architecture.md, styling.md, and testing.md 2. **Testability** — restructure code so `/optimus:unit-test` can safely increase coverage without risky refactoring
If `git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree` does not return `true`, read `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/init/references/multi-repo-detection.md` and apply it. When it returns `true`, resolve the repository root with `git rev-parse --show-toplevel`, including in a linked worktree or subdirectory. In a multi-repo workspace, load each targeted repo's `.claude/CLAUDE.md` and `.claude/docs/` (not the workspace root's) and apply that repo's context to its files; if the scope doesn't determine a repo, ask which one.
If `.claude/CLAUDE.md` or `.claude/docs/coding-guidelines.md` is missing, recommend `/optimus:init` first. On the user's choice to continue, fall back to the bundled baseline: read `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/init/templates/docs/coding-guidelines.md` and work against it plus general best practices, and note in the report that findings are generic, not project-specific.
**Focus:** a bare `testability` or `guidelines` argument sets the focus and is consumed from the scope text — a keyword inside a quoted string is scope, not focus (`"improve testability in auth"` → no focus). If both appear, take the first and say the other needs its own pass. Everything remaining is natural-language scope.
**Scope:** if the arguments describe a scope, map it to directory paths by scanning the project structure — no question needed. Otherwise use `AskUserQuestion` (header "Scope"):
For changed-since, use `git diff --name-only <ref>...HEAD` for commits, branches, and tags; for relative dates use `git log --no-merges --since="2 weeks ago" --format= --name-only` instead (`--since` is a `git log` flag, not `git diff`). Apply Step 3's exclusions to the result. In a monorepo with full-project scope, ask which subprojects to include (default: all).
If your invocation prompt contains `HARNESS_MODE_INLINE`, you are a single iteration inside the `/optimus:deep` orchestrator: read `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/references/harness-mode.md` and follow its single-iteration protocol, which overrides the interactive steps — it covers progress-file reading, scope and file-list rules, agent-prompt overrides (including the Iteration Context Block on iterations 2+), and the apply/output protocol.
Before interpreting the progress file's iteration and findings fields, inspect its `harness` field. Only when `harness` equals `"test-coverage"`, load the **Refactor Phase Execution** section of `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/references/coverage-harness-mode.md` and apply its field mapping and overrides to the shared protocol. Standalone refactor progress has no such marker and uses the shared protocol's normal mapping; both dispatches use `Phase: refactor`.
Refactor's deltas, which that reference defers back to this note:
If `HARNESS_MODE_INLINE` is not present, continue with the interactive flow below.
Read `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/init/references/constraint-doc-loading.md` and load the docs it lists, applying its skill-authoring lens, its monorepo scoping rule, and its submodule exclusion. These docs define the rules: every suggestion must be justified by what they establish — never impose external preferences.
Within the scope, identify source directories. Skip non-source directories (dependencies, build output, framework caches, dot-directories), minified/lock/binary files, and the generated source files listed under "All Agents Exclude" in `$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/references/shared-agent-constraints.md`. Group areas by top-level source directory (monorepo: by subproject, then directory) and rank by recent churn:
git log --no-merges --since="3 months" --format= --name-only -- <scope-path> | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
Analyze highest-churn areas first; for full-project scope on a large codebase, start with the top 10. Briefly summarize docs loaded (and any missing, with fallback status), project type, and ranked areas, then proceed immediately — do not wait for confirmation.
The four lenses below must all be covered. Size the fan-out to the scope: **for a handful of files, analyze them yourself in one pass** — four subagents over three files each re-read CLAUDE.m
Repo: oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude
Runs a structured design conversation — clarifies intent, proposes 2-3 approaches with trade-offs, iterates the design — and writes a user-approved engineering…
Reviews local changes, an open PR/MR, or a branch diff against the project's own coding guidelines through the review lenses — bugs, security, guidelines,…
Stages, commits, and optionally pushes local changes with a Conventional Commits message — always previews and confirms first, and offers a feature branch on…
Runs an iterative auto-fix loop on a chosen target — review, refactor, or coverage — dispatching the base skill into fresh subagent contexts per iteration,…
Prunes and consolidates the project's auto-memory to keep it minimal — deletes stale, wrong, or redundant memories, merges overlapping ones into existing…
Runs a Gauntlet Loop: turns an ambitious goal and optional quality references into a minimal builder/critic prompt judged against a concrete comparison bar,…