Analyse de refactorisation

VérifiéSûr

Analyse le code pour identifier des opportunités de refactoring avec une évaluation de l'impact (blast radius), une estimation des risques et un ordre d'opérations recommandé. Aide les développeurs à planifier des initiatives de refactoring en évaluant la complexité, la duplication et le couplage avant d'apporter des modifications.

Spar Skills Guide Bot
DeveloppementIntermédiaire
5002/06/2026
Claude CodeCursorWindsurf
#code-refactoring#technical-debt#code-analysis#maintainability#code-smells

Recommandé pour

Notre avis

Analyse le code pour identifier des opportunités de refactorisation avec évaluation de l'impact et des risques, et produit des recommandations sans effectuer les modifications.

Points forts

  • Identifie plusieurs défauts de code avec emplacements précis
  • Évalue l'impact (blast radius) et le risque pour chaque suggestion
  • Recommande un ordre d'opérations basé sur les dépendances et les risques
  • Tient compte de la couverture de tests

Limites

  • Analyse uniquement, ne réalise pas la refactorisation
  • Peut manquer des nuances contextuelles comme l'intention métier
  • Se base sur des motifs d'analyse statique, pas sur le comportement runtime
Quand l'utiliser

Lors de la planification d'un sprint de refactorisation, de l'évaluation de la dette technique, ou pour analyser l'impact de modifications potentielles avant de coder.

Quand l'éviter

Lorsque vous avez besoin d'une exécution automatisée immédiate de refactorisation, ou pour des changements triviaux sur un seul fichier où une simple modification suffit.

Analyse de sécurité

Sûr
Score qualité90/100

This skill is read-only analysis with Read, Glob, Grep tools. It does not execute any code, modify files, or access external resources. No destructive actions or data exfiltration risks.

Aucun point d'attention détecté

Exemples

Refactor analysis of a single file
Analyze pkg/auth/handler.go for refactoring opportunities, focusing on complexity and duplication.
Full package technical debt assessment
Review the utils/ directory and identify all code smells, blast radius, and suggest a refactoring plan with risk levels.
Component-level analysis for frontend
Find refactoring opportunities in the UserProfile component, particularly around state management and render logic.

name: refactor description: Analyze code and suggest refactoring opportunities with blast radius assessment, risk evaluation, and recommended order of operations license: MIT compatibility:

  • runtime:any allowed-tools:
  • Read
  • Glob
  • Grep metadata: author: thoreinstein version: 1.0.0

Refactor

Analyze code and suggest refactoring opportunities with rationale. This is an analysis-only skill - it identifies and documents refactoring opportunities but does not execute them.

When to Use

  • Reviewing code for improvement opportunities
  • Planning a refactoring initiative
  • Assessing technical debt in a codebase area
  • Evaluating complexity, duplication, or coupling concerns
  • Understanding blast radius before making changes

Input

  • Target: file path, directory/package, or function/component name
  • Optional: specific concern (duplication, complexity, coupling, testability, etc.)

Investigation Strategy

Track 1: Codebase Exploration

  • Map dependencies and call sites for target code
  • Identify blast radius of potential changes
  • Find related code with similar patterns
  • Assess test coverage of affected areas

Track 2: Code Analysis

  • Deep analysis of code smells and patterns
  • Identify refactoring opportunities
  • Assess complexity metrics
  • Evaluate maintainability concerns

Refactoring Patterns

Universal Patterns

| Pattern | Description | |---------|-------------| | Extract function/method | Pull out reusable logic | | Inline function/variable | Remove unnecessary indirection | | Rename | Improve clarity (with blast radius assessment) | | Move | Relocate to better home (file, package, module) | | Replace conditional with polymorphism | Simplify branching | | Introduce parameter object | Group related parameters | | Dependency inversion | Decouple via interfaces/abstractions |

Go-Specific Patterns

| Pattern | Description | |---------|-------------| | Extract interface | Define behavior contracts | | Consolidate error handling | Reduce repetitive error checks | | Replace concrete with interface | Improve testability | | Extract middleware | Separate cross-cutting concerns | | Table-driven refactor | Convert repetitive code to data-driven |

Frontend-Specific Patterns

| Pattern | Description | |---------|-------------| | Extract component | Break down large components | | Extract custom hook | Reuse stateful logic | | Lift state up | Move state to common ancestor | | Push state down | Colocate state with usage | | Extract render function | Simplify complex JSX | | Memoization | Optimize re-renders |

Output

Document the analysis using the template at references/templates/refactor-analysis.md.

The analysis should include:

  • Code smells identified with locations
  • Suggested refactorings with risk assessment
  • Blast radius for each change
  • Recommended order of operations
  • Test coverage assessment

Constraints

  • Analysis only: Do not execute refactorings - document recommendations
  • Blast radius required: Every suggestion must include affected files/functions
  • Risk assessment required: Every suggestion must be rated Low/Medium/High
  • Order matters: Recommend sequence based on risk and dependencies
  • Test awareness: Note test coverage and impact for each suggestion

Example

Refactoring Analysis: pkg/auth/handler.go

Target:
- Path: pkg/auth/handler.go
- Scope: file
- Concern: complexity

Summary:
The auth handler has grown to 450 lines with 3 code smells identified.
Recommend extracting token validation and session management into
separate services. Low-risk changes that improve testability.

Code Smells Identified:

1. Long Function (validateAndCreateSession)
   - Location: handler.go:145-280
   - Description: 135-line function handling validation, session
     creation, and response formatting
   - Impact: Hard to test, multiple responsibilities

2. Feature Envy (token validation)
   - Location: handler.go:156-198
   - Description: Handler reaches into token package internals
   - Impact: Tight coupling, changes ripple across packages

Suggested Refactorings:

1. Extract TokenValidator service
   - Type: Extract
   - Target: handler.go:156-198
   - Rationale: Encapsulates token validation logic
   - Blast Radius: handler.go, handler_test.go
   - Risk: Low — isolated logic, good test coverage
   - Test Impact: Add TokenValidator unit tests

2. Extract SessionManager service
   - Type: Extract
   - Target: handler.go:200-250
   - Rationale: Separates session concerns from HTTP handling
   - Blast Radius: handler.go, session.go, handler_test.go
   - Risk: Medium — touches session storage
   - Test Impact: Update integration tests

Recommended Order:
1. TokenValidator first (lowest risk, no dependencies)
2. SessionManager second (depends on cleaner handler)

Begin by identifying the target code and any specific concerns to focus on.

Skills similaires