/clean-code-refiner

name: clean-code-refiner
description: "Facilitate a structured conversation to define clean code principles for a repository. Produces a formal clean-code.md document that the clean-code atom will use as its override. Use when setting up coding standards, defining code quality rules, or when the user says 'setup clean code', 'define coding standards', 'code quality principles', 'coding guidelines', or 'help me define my code standards'."

Clean Code Refiner

What This Produces

• **Output**: `.lattice/standards/clean-code.md` (or custom path from `.lattice/config.yaml` -> `paths.clean_code`)
• **Two modes**:
• **Overlay** (`mode: overlay`): A slim document containing only sections that differ from the defaults. The clean-code atom reads its embedded defaults first, then applies this document's sections on top. This is the expected common case.
• **Override** (`mode: override`): A comprehensive standalone document that fully replaces the atom's embedded defaults. For teams with fundamentally different coding standards.
• **Default mode**: Overlay -- produces only what the user wants to change
• **Config key**: `paths.clean_code` in `.lattice/config.yaml`
• **Template**: Read `./assets/template.md` for the full document structure, default content, and interview guidance comments

Scope Clarification

This skill defines the *rules of code craftsmanship* -- how individual functions, classes, and modules should be written. It does not define architecture (that is the architecture-refiner) or domain modeling (that is the ddd-refiner). The boundaries:

• **Clean code** -- function size, naming, complexity, error handling, testability, abstraction discipline
• **Clean architecture** -- layers, dependency direction, command/query flows, structural placement
• **DDD** -- aggregates, entities, value objects, domain events, repository patterns

Before You Begin

Check for existing documents

Before starting the interview, check whether a custom document already exists:

1. Read `.lattice/config.yaml` -- does `paths.clean_code` point to a file? 2. If yes, read that file. Ask the user:

• "You already have a custom clean code document. Would you like to **revise** it (update specific sections), **start fresh** (new interview), or **add to it** (add new sections)?"
• Revise: Load the existing document, walk through only the sections the user wants to change, and update in place.
• Start fresh: Proceed with the full interview flow below.
• Add to it: Skip to the "New Sections" part of the interview.

3. If no config or no existing document, proceed with the full interview flow.

Scan the repository

Look for signals that inform the conversation:

• **Linter configs**: ESLint, Pylint, Rubocop, etc. -- what rules are already enforced? What complexity thresholds are configured?
• **Formatter configs**: Prettier, Black, gofmt -- what formatting decisions are already automated?
• **Existing code style**: Are functions generally short or long? Imperative or functional? Heavy on comments or sparse?
• **Test patterns**: What testing framework? Co-located or separate? Mocking patterns?
• **Language**: TypeScript, Python, Go, Java, etc. -- language idioms affect naming conventions and error handling patterns.

Share relevant findings with the user at the start: "I noticed your project has ESLint configured with max-complexity: 15 and uses Prettier for formatting. I'll use that as context."

If the project is new with no code, proceed with pure defaults as the starting point.

Choosing the Mode

The first decision in the conversation. Present the three options:

"How would you like to define your clean code principles?

1. **Customize specific sections** (overlay) -- Keep the defaults and change only what differs for your project. This produces a slim document. Most teams choose this. 2. **Define everything from scratch** (override) -- Walk through all sections and produce a comprehensive standalone document. 3. **Add project-specific sections only** (overlay with additions) -- Keep all defaults as-is and add new sections for your team's specific rules.

The defaults cover standard clean code practices well. Option 1 is recommended unless your coding standards are fundamentally different."

Map the choice:

• Options 1 and 3 -> `mode: overlay`
• Option 2 -> `mode: override`

Facilitation Approach

Conversation style

• **One section at a time.** Do not dump all questions at once. Walk through the template sequentially.
• **Defaults-first.** For each section, briefly summarize the default, then ask if it matches. Do not read the entire default verbatim -- summarize the key points and ask.
• **Record decisions, not discussion.** The output document reads as a specification, not meeting notes. "We discussed X and decided Y" is wrong. "Y" is right.
• **Probe, don't interrogate.** Use the probing questions in the template guidance comments as follow-ups when the user's answer is ambiguous, not as a checklist.

For overlay mode

This should be fast. Many sections will be "keep as-is."

1. Present each section's default briefly (a 2-3 sentence summary, not full content). 2. Ask: "Does this match your project, or would you like to change it?" 3. If the user says it matches -> skip it (section will NOT appear in the output). 4. If the user wants changes -> dive into that section, discuss the specifics, record the changes. 5. At the end, ask: "Any sections you'd like to add that aren't in the defaults?" (e.g., language-specific idioms, framework patterns). 6. Only sections the user changed or added appear in the output document.

For override mode

This is thorough. Every section gets attention and appears in the output.

1. Walk through every section in full detail. 2. User confirms, modifies, or replaces each section. 3. All sections appear in the output -- defaults for unchanged ones, user's version for changed ones.

Common scenarios

• **"I agree with everyt