Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

synaptic-pruning突触修剪

Agent Skill

synaptic-pruning 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。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

8,861

周安装

355

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

2,868
OpenClaw

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

MIT-0

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:synaptic-pruning(突触修剪)
来源仓库:https://github.com/jcools1977/synaptic-pruning
安装命令:
openclaw skills install synaptic-pruning
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install synaptic-pruning

简介

识别代码中的残留结构如未使用导入、僵尸配置与孤立测试。

  • 适用于代码清理、技术债务治理或项目瘦身优化场景。
  • 扫描项目文件后输出可删除项列表供人工确认执行。
  • 具备文件修改能力,操作前务必备份重要代码仓库。
  • 建议在非生产环境先行验证检测结果可靠性。synaptic-pruning 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

name
synaptic-pruning
version
1.0.0
description
>
author
J. DeVere Cooley
category
cognitive-diagnostics
tags
metadata
openclaw
emoji
🧠
os
["darwin", "linux", "win32"]
cost
free
requires_api
false
tags

Synaptic Pruning

"A brain that never prunes becomes a brain that can't think. A codebase that never prunes becomes a codebase that can't change."

What It Does

Your linter finds unused imports. Your compiler finds unreachable code. Synaptic Pruning finds vestigial organs — code that is technically reachable, technically used, technically valid — but serves no living purpose.

In neuroscience, synaptic pruning eliminates neural connections the brain no longer needs. It's not destruction — it's *maturation*. A child's brain has more synapses than an adult's. The adult brain is more capable because it has fewer.

Your codebase needs the same process.

The Seven Vestigial Classes

1. Zombie Features

Features that are fully implemented, fully compiled, fully deployed — and fully unused. No user path reaches them. No button triggers them. They exist because nobody was confident enough to delete them.

Detection: Trace every UI element and API endpoint to user-reachable paths.
Flag features with zero invocations in the last N deployment cycles.

2. Fossil Configurations

Config keys, feature flags, and environment settings that are read by code but never influence behavior. The if branch they gate is always true (or always false). They're the appendix of your architecture.

# This flag has been 'true' in every environment for 2 years
feature_flags:
  enable_new_checkout: true  # "new" checkout is the only checkout
  use_v2_api: true           # v1 was decommissioned 18 months ago
  experimental_search: true  # shipped to 100% of users last March

Detection: Evaluate every config-gated branch. If the gate has been in the same state across all environments for > N days, the gate is a fossil.

3. Orphaned Tests

Tests that pass, appear in coverage reports, and validate... nothing that matters. They test functions that were refactored away, mock interfaces that no longer exist, or assert behavior that was intentionally changed (and the test was updated to match the new behavior, making it a tautology).

def test_calculate_discount():
    # This test was updated when discounts were removed.
    # It now tests that the function returns 0. Always.
    # It will never fail. It validates nothing.
    assert calculate_discount(any_input) == 0

Detection: Identify tests where every assertion is trivially true, where mocks replace 100% of real behavior, or where the tested function's actual callsites have all been removed.

4. Compatibility Shims

Adapters, wrappers, and translation layers that were added for a migration that completed. The old system is gone. The shim remains, adding a layer of indirection that obscures the actual architecture.

// Added during the Angular → React migration (2023)
// Angular was fully removed in 2024
// This wrapper still wraps every React component for no reason
export function withAngularCompat(Component) {
  return Component; // literally returns its input unchanged
}

Detection: Find wrapper/adapter functions where input === output, translation layers where source and target are the same format, and abstraction layers with exactly one implementation.

5. Defensive Fossils

Error handling, validation, and guard clauses that protect against conditions that the current architecture makes impossible. They were necessary under a previous design. Now they're scar tissue.

// This nil check was necessary when getUser() could return nil
// After the auth rewrite, getUser() always returns a valid user or panics
// This branch is unreachable but looks important
if user == nil {
    return ErrUserNotFound // this line has never executed in production
}

Detection: Analyze guard clauses against current control flow. If a predecessor guarantees the condition can never be true, the guard is a fossil.

6. Documentation Ghosts

README sections, API docs, and inline comments that describe systems, processes, or architectures that no longer exist. They don't cause bugs — they cause *wrong mental models*, which is worse.

## Deployment Process
1. SSH into the staging server        ← We use Kubernetes now
2. Run the deploy script              ← Replaced by GitHub Actions
3. Verify the health check endpoint   ← Endpoint was renamed
4. Update the load balancer config    ← Handled automatically by Istio

Detection: Cross-reference documentation commands, paths, and process descriptions against actual project tooling, CI/CD configs, and infrastructure definitions.

7. Evolutionary Dead Ends

Entire modules or subsystems that represent an architectural direction the team tried and abandoned — but the code was never fully removed. Partial implementations, experimental branches merged to main, or V2 rewrites that were started but never finished.

src/
├── search/           ← Current search (Elasticsearch)
├── search-v2/        ← Started migrating to Meilisearch. Stopped.
│   ├── index.ts      ← 40% implemented
│   ├── client.ts     ← Works but unused
│   └── README.md     ← "TODO: finish migration"

Detection: Find directories/modules with high internal cohesion but zero external references. Flag modules where >50% of exports are unused outside the module.

The Pruning Process

Phase 1: CENSUS
├── Catalog every function, class, config, test, and doc section
├── Build a full reachability graph from user-facing entry points
├── Map every feature flag and its historical states
└── Timestamp: when was each unit last meaningfully modified?

Phase 2: VITALITY CHECK
├── For each unit, determine: is it alive, dormant, or dead?
│   ├── Alive: reachable, executed, behavior matters
│   ├── Dormant: reachable but behavior is constant/trivial
│   └── Dead: unreachable, untriggered, or tautological
├── Score confidence (how certain is the classification)
└── Flag borderline cases for human review

Phase 3: PRUNING PLAN
├── Group vestigial code by class (1-7 above)
├── Calculate removal safety (what could break)
├── Estimate cognitive load reduction (lines × complexity × frequency-of-reading)
├── Generate ordered removal plan (safest-first)
└── Produce before/after complexity metrics

Phase 4: MATURATION REPORT
├── Total vestigial burden (lines, files, cognitive weight)
├── Recommended pruning order with safety scores
├── Estimated improvement in onboarding time
└── Codebase age distribution (living vs. fossil)

Vitality Scoring

ScoreStateAction
100Fully aliveNo action
75-99Alive but calcifyingMonitor for drift
50-74DormantReview for removal
25-49Effectively deadSchedule removal
1-24Dead weightRemove immediately
0Never livedDelete with prejudice

Output Format

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║                  SYNAPTIC PRUNING REPORT                    ║
║              Codebase Maturity: 67% (Growing)               ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║                                                              ║
║  VESTIGIAL BURDEN: 4,217 lines across 38 files              ║
║  COGNITIVE WEIGHT: ~12% of total codebase complexity         ║
║  ESTIMATED ONBOARDING REDUCTION: 1.5 days                   ║
║                                                              ║
║  BY CLASS:                                                   ║
║  ├── Zombie Features ......... 2 features, 890 lines        ║
║  ├── Fossil Configurations ... 14 flags, 3 always-true      ║
║  ├── Orphaned Tests .......... 7 tests, 340 lines           ║
║  ├── Compatibility Shims ..... 4 wrappers, identity funcs   ║
║  ├── Defensive Fossils ....... 23 unreachable guards        ║
║  ├── Documentation Ghosts .... 3 sections, 2 READMEs       ║
║  └── Evolutionary Dead Ends .. 1 module (search-v2/)        ║
║                                                              ║
║  SAFE TO PRUNE NOW: 2,841 lines (0 risk)                    ║
║  PRUNE WITH REVIEW: 1,376 lines (low risk)                  ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝

When to Invoke

  • After a major version release (prune the migration artifacts)
  • Before onboarding new team members (reduce noise)
  • Quarterly codebase health reviews
  • After any "why does this exist?" question in code review

Why It Matters

Dead code doesn't just waste disk space. It wastes attention. Every vestigial function a developer reads, every fossil config they try to understand, every zombie feature they accidentally modify — that's cognitive load stolen from productive work.

The leanest codebases aren't the ones that added the least. They're the ones that pruned the most.

Zero external dependencies. Zero API calls. Pure evolutionary analysis.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

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

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

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

OpenClaw

96.44%
按下载量换算2,766

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

可疑

Static analysis

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。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。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