Skip to content
Back to skills

Simplify

ASecurity

Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency, then clean up what you find — duplicated logic that could reuse an existing helper, hacky or redundant patterns, needless work on hot paths. Quality cleanup only: not bugs (that's code-review) and not behavior-preserving restructuring on request (that's refactor). Use when the user says "simplify", "clean this up", "is there a simpler way", or "tidy the diff".

  • 84 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 24, 2026
ai-agentsbashcode-reviewgit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 24, 2026

npx -y skills add genai-io/san --skill simplify --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Simplify?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Simplify
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/genai-io-simplify/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/genai-io-simplify)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: simplify
description: >-
  Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency, then clean up what you
  find — duplicated logic that could reuse an existing helper, hacky or redundant
  patterns, needless work on hot paths. Quality cleanup only: not bugs (that's
  code-review) and not behavior-preserving restructuring on request (that's
  refactor). Use when the user says "simplify", "clean this up", "is there a
  simpler way", or "tidy the diff".
allowed-tools:
  - Bash
  - Read
  - Glob
  - Grep
  - Edit
  - Agent
argument-hint: "[focus area]"
---

# Simplify: quality cleanup on the changed code

Review the changed code for cleanups it would benefit from, then apply them. This
is the **quality** pass — reuse, hacky patterns, wasted work. It is not the bug
pass (`code-review`) and not a requested restructuring (`refactor`); stay in its
lane and don't report correctness bugs or propose structural rewrites here.

## Phase 1: Identify changes

Run `git diff` (or `git diff HEAD` when changes are staged). With no git changes,
review the most recently modified files the user named or that you edited earlier
in this conversation.

## Phase 2: Review across three lenses (in parallel)

Use the Agent tool to launch three reviewers concurrently in one message
(foreground). Give each the full diff. Each returns a short list of concrete,
located findings.

- **Reuse.** New code that duplicates an existing helper or utility; hand-rolled
  logic (string munging, path handling, env checks, type guards) that the
  codebase already has a function for. Point to the existing one to use instead.
- **Quality.** Redundant state that could be derived; parameter sprawl instead of
  restructuring; near-duplicate blocks that should share an abstraction; leaky
  abstractions; stringly-typed code where a constant/enum exists; needless wrapper
  layers; conditionals nested 3+ deep (flatten with early returns or a lookup);
  comments that narrate WHAT instead of non-obvious WHY.
- **Efficiency.** Redundant computation or repeated reads; independent work run
  sequentially that could be parallel; new blocking work on a startup or
  per-request hot path; unconditional no-op updates in loops/handlers (guard with
  change detection); pre-checking existence before operating (TOCTOU); unbounded
  growth or leaked resources; reading/loading far more than needed.

## Phase 3: Apply the cleanups

Aggregate the findings and fix each directly. Keep each fix minimal and matched to
the file's existing style. If a finding is a false positive or not worth it, skip
it — don't argue with it. When done, briefly summarize what you cleaned up, or
confirm the code was already clean.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…