Refactoring assessment and patterns. Use after tests pass (GREEN phase) to assess improvement opportunities.
Installation
Details
Usage
After installing, this skill will be available to your AI coding assistant.
Verify installation:
skills listSkill Instructions
name: refactoring description: Refactoring assessment and patterns. Use after tests pass (GREEN phase) to assess improvement opportunities.
Refactoring
Refactoring is the third step of TDD. After GREEN, assess if refactoring adds value.
When to Refactor
- Always assess after green
- Only refactor if it improves the code
- Commit working code BEFORE refactoring (critical safety net)
Commit Before Refactoring - WHY
Having a working baseline before refactoring:
- Allows reverting if refactoring breaks things
- Provides safety net for experimentation
- Makes refactoring less risky
- Shows clear separation in git history
Workflow:
- GREEN: Tests pass
- COMMIT: Save working code
- REFACTOR: Improve structure
- COMMIT: Save refactored code
Priority Classification
| Priority | Action | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Fix now | Mutations, knowledge duplication, >3 levels nesting |
| High | This session | Magic numbers, unclear names, >30 line functions |
| Nice | Later | Minor naming, single-use helpers |
| Skip | Don't change | Already clean code |
DRY = Knowledge, Not Code
Abstract when:
- Same business concept (semantic meaning)
- Would change together if requirements change
- Obvious why grouped together
Keep separate when:
- Different concepts that look similar (structural)
- Would evolve independently
- Coupling would be confusing
Example Assessment
// After GREEN:
const processOrder = (order: Order): ProcessedOrder => {
const itemsTotal = order.items.reduce((sum, item) => sum + item.price, 0);
const shipping = itemsTotal > 50 ? 0 : 5.99;
return { ...order, total: itemsTotal + shipping, shippingCost: shipping };
};
// ASSESSMENT:
// ⚠️ High: Magic numbers 50, 5.99 → extract constants
// ✅ Skip: Structure is clear enough
// DECISION: Extract constants only
Speculative Code is a TDD Violation
If code isn't driven by a failing test, don't write it.
Key lesson: Every line must have a test that demanded its existence.
❌ Speculative code examples:
- "Just in case" logic
- Features not yet needed
- Code written "for future flexibility"
- Untested error handling paths
What to do: Delete speculative code. Add behavior tests instead.
When NOT to Refactor
Don't refactor when:
- ❌ Code works correctly (no bug to fix)
- ❌ No test demands the change (speculative refactoring)
- ❌ Would change behavior (that's a feature, not refactoring)
- ❌ Premature optimization
- ❌ Code is "good enough" for current phase
Remember: Refactoring should improve code structure without changing behavior.
Commit Messages for Refactoring
refactor: extract scenario validation logic
refactor: simplify error handling flow
refactor: rename ambiguous parameter names
Format: refactor: <what was changed>
Note: Refactoring commits should NOT be mixed with feature commits.
Refactoring Checklist
- All tests pass without modification
- No new public APIs added
- Code more readable than before
- Committed separately from features
- Committed BEFORE refactoring (safety net)
- No speculative code added
- Behavior unchanged (tests prove this)
More by citypaul
View allTypeScript strict mode patterns. Use when writing any TypeScript code.
DOM Testing Library patterns for behavior-driven UI testing. Framework-agnostic patterns for testing user interfaces. Use when testing any front-end application.
Functional programming patterns with immutable data. Use when writing logic or data transformations.
Planning work in small, known-good increments. Use when starting significant work or breaking down complex tasks.