Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

code-cleanup代码清理

Agent Skill

code-cleanup 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

192

周安装

8

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

64
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:code-cleanup(代码清理)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hungv47/prod-skills
仓库路径:skills/code-cleanup
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/prod-skills --skill code-cleanup
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/prod-skills --skill code-cleanup

简介

用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue 和 Pull Request 等协作信息。

  • 适合围绕项目状态和代码变更进行信息整理。
  • 可通过指定仓库和技能名称进行安装使用。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。
  • 使用前应确认权限及是否触发网络或文件读写操作。
  • code-cleanup 属于开发类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Code Cleanup — Orchestrator

*Productivity — Multi-agent orchestration. Structural cleanup, code-level cleanup, and refactoring — without breaking functionality.*

Core Question: "Is this change purely structural with zero behavioral impact?"

Inputs Required

  • A codebase or set of files to clean up
  • User intent: structural reorganization, code-level cleanup, refactoring, or all three

Output

  • .agents/cleanup-report.md

Chain Position

Previous: none | Next: none (standalone)

Re-run triggers: After major feature additions, before release milestones, when test suite runtime grows significantly, or when onboarding new team members.


Multi-Agent Architecture

Agent Roster

AgentFileFocus
structural-scanner-agentagents/structural-scanner-agent.mdJunk files, empty dirs, naming conventions, structure anomalies
code-scanner-agentagents/code-scanner-agent.mdAI slop, code smells, dead code, safety issues
dependency-scanner-agentagents/dependency-scanner-agent.mdUnused packages, duplicates, security vulnerabilities
safe-removal-agentagents/safe-removal-agent.mdExecutes verified deletions with backup commits
refactoring-agentagents/refactoring-agent.mdApplies targeted refactoring without behavioral change
validation-agentagents/validation-agent.mdRuns tests, types, lint, build — reports pass/fail
critic-agentagents/critic-agent.mdGolden rules compliance, behavioral preservation review

Execution Layers

Layer 1 (parallel):
  structural-scanner-agent ───┐
  code-scanner-agent ─────────┤── scan simultaneously
  dependency-scanner-agent ───┘

Layer 2 (sequential):
  safe-removal-agent ──────────── removes verified targets from all 3 scans
    → refactoring-agent ───────── applies code-level fixes from code scanner
      → validation-agent ──────── runs all checks
        → critic-agent ─────────── final golden rules review

Dispatch Protocol

  1. Triage — determine scope from user intent:

- "Reorganize files" → structural-scanner only - "Remove AI slop" → code-scanner only - "Clean up the codebase" → all three scanners

  1. Layer 1 dispatch — send brief to relevant scanner agents in parallel.
  2. Safe removal — pass all scan results to safe-removal-agent. It creates a backup commit, then removes verified-safe targets.
  3. Refactoring — pass code scanner results + removal results to refactoring-agent. It fixes code-level issues.
  4. Validationvalidation-agent runs all available checks (tests, types, lint, build).
  5. Critic reviewcritic-agent checks golden rules compliance. If FAIL, identify the specific change to revert.
  6. Assembly — compile cleanup report. Save to .agents/cleanup-report.md.

Routing Rules

ConditionRoute
User says "structural only"Only dispatch structural-scanner → safe-removal → validation → critic
User says "code-level only"Only dispatch code-scanner → refactoring → validation → critic
User says "refactor this"Only dispatch code-scanner → refactoring → validation → critic
User says "clean up everything"All scanners → safe-removal → refactoring → validation → critic
Validation failsIdentify which change broke it; revert that specific change
Critic PASSAssemble report and deliver
Critic FAILRevert specific change; re-run validation
Session >30 changesStop and reassess scope

Critical Gates (The 5 Golden Rules)

Before delivering, the critic-agent verifies ALL golden rules pass:

  1. Preserve behavior — Every change must produce the same observable behavior. If you can't verify this, don't make the change.
  2. Small incremental steps — One change at a time. Commit between steps. Never combine a refactor with a feature change.
  3. Check existing conventions first — Before changing anything, read the codebase's existing coding guidelines, linting config, naming patterns, and file structure. Match them.
  4. Test after each change — Run the test suite after every modification. If tests break, revert and try a smaller step.
  5. Rollback awareness — Commit before starting. Note the hash. If a change chain gets too complex, revert and try a different approach.

Additional gate: Session limits — target ~30 changes per cleanup session. After 15 changes, generate an interim summary. If each fix spawns 2+ new issues, stop and reassess.

If any golden rule fails: the critic identifies the specific change that violated it and recommends reverting.


Single-Agent Fallback

When context window is constrained or the cleanup scope is small (fewer than 5 files):

  1. Skip multi-agent dispatch
  2. Create backup commit
  3. Scan the target files for structural issues, code smells, and dead code
  4. Apply fixes one at a time, testing after each
  5. Run all available checks
  6. Verify golden rules compliance as self-review
  7. Save to .agents/cleanup-report.md

Triage

Determine scope before starting. Parts can be used independently or combined.

User intentScanners to dispatch
"Reorganize files", "remove dead code", "clean up repo structure"structural-scanner-agent
"Remove AI slop", "clean up PR", "fix code smells"code-scanner-agent
"Check dependencies", "remove unused packages"dependency-scanner-agent
"Refactor this", "extract this", "redesign this module"code-scanner-agent → refactoring-agent
"Clean up the codebase" (broad)All three scanners → safe-removal → refactoring

AI Slop Patterns

The code-scanner-agent specifically looks for these AI-generated code patterns:

Comments to remove:

  • Obvious/redundant comments explaining what code clearly does
  • Comments that don't match the commenting style elsewhere in the file
  • Section divider comments when not used elsewhere

Defensive code to remove:

  • Try/catch blocks around code that doesn't throw
  • Null/undefined checks when callers guarantee valid input
  • Type guards that duplicate earlier validation

Type issues to fix:

  • Casts to any that bypass TypeScript's type system
  • Type assertions that hide real type mismatches
  • Overly broad generic types when specific types exist

When NOT to Refactor

The refactoring-agent skips these situations:

  • No test coverage — you can't verify behavior is preserved. Write tests first.
  • Tight deadline — ship first, refactor later.
  • Code that won't change again — if nobody will read or modify it, the investment doesn't pay off.
  • During a feature change — separate commits. Always.

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternProblemINSTEAD
Behavioral changes disguised as cleanupObservable output changesrefactoring-agent verifies same behavior, different structure
"Tests pass so it's fine"Incomplete coverage means passing tests don't guarantee equivalencevalidation-agent flags uncovered code for manual verification
Combining cleanup with featuresOne change at a timesafe-removal and refactoring agents never add features
Removing "probably unused" codeMay be dynamically importeddependency-scanner verifies zero imports before flagging
Flagging conventions as smellsExisting patterns are intentionalcode-scanner reads surrounding code before flagging
Large batch removalsCan't identify which removal broke somethingsafe-removal-agent works in small batches, tests between each

Worked Example

User: "Clean up this Express API project, it's gotten messy after 6 months."

Triage: Broad cleanup — dispatch all three scanners.

Layer 1 (parallel):

  • structural-scanner-agent → 4 unused files in /utils, 2 duplicate helpers, naming inconsistency (userController.js vs product-controller.js)
  • code-scanner-agent → Pass 1: 0 safety issues. Pass 2: 12 TODO comments, 3 console.log, 2 commented-out blocks (>50 lines each), 5 AI slop instances
  • dependency-scanner-agent → 2 unused dependencies (lodash, moment), 1 duplicate (underscore alongside lodash)

Layer 2 (sequential):

  • safe-removal-agent → backup commit, removes 4 unused files + 2 commented blocks + lodash + underscore. Tests pass.
  • refactoring-agent → extracts shared validation into middleware/validate.js, normalizes to kebab-case, removes 12 TODOs and 3 console.logs
  • validation-agent → bun test: 47/47 pass. tsc --noEmit: clean. Lint: clean.
  • critic-agent → PASS. All 5 golden rules pass.

Artifact saved to .agents/cleanup-report.md.


Artifact Template

On re-run: rename existing artifact to cleanup-report.v[N].md and create new with incremented version.

---
skill: code-cleanup
version: 1
date: {{today}}
status: complete
---

# Cleanup Report

## Scope
[Structural / Code-Level / Refactoring / All]

## Changes Made
### Structural
### Code-Level
### Refactoring

## Validation
- Tests: [PASS/FAIL]
- Type check: [PASS/FAIL/SKIPPED]
- Lint: [PASS/FAIL/SKIPPED]
- Build: [PASS/FAIL/SKIPPED]

## Manual Verification Needed
[Features lacking test coverage]

Scripts

  • scripts/analyze_codebase.py — Static analysis tool that generates dependency reports, identifies junk files, empty directories, large directories, and potentially unused code files. Used by structural-scanner-agent and dependency-scanner-agent.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.49%
按下载量换算23

Claude

32.49%
按下载量换算21

Cursor

18.09%
按下载量换算12

Gemini CLI

8.79%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills