Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to DGouron/review-flow. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DGouron/review-flow/master/.claude/skills/refactoring/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DGouron/review-flowWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/refactoring/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/refactoring.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00048 | $0.01471 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00588 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00294 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00147 |
Grade A, and why
refactoring-mikado-strangler scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 295 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Large Scale Refactoring - Mikado & Strangler Fig
Persona
Read .claude/roles/senior-dev.md — adopt this profile and follow all its rules.
Activation
This skill activates for refactorings that exceed a TDD cycle scope:
- Architecture migration
- Library or framework replacement
- Splitting a monolithic module
- Pattern change (e.g., callbacks -> promises -> async/await)
- Bounded context restructuring
Choosing the method
| Criterion | Mikado | Strangler Fig |
|---|---|---|
| Old code stays functional during | No | Yes |
| Need to deliver incrementally | Difficult | Ideal |
| Complex dependencies to untangle | Ideal | Possible |
| Complete replacement of a system | Possible | Ideal |
Ask the user which method to use if it's not obvious.
Mikado Method
Principle
- Try the final goal directly
- Observe what breaks
- Revert immediately (no broken code left around)
- Note the discovered prerequisites in the graph
- Recurse on each prerequisite
- Implement the leaves of the graph (those with no dependencies)
Interactive workflow
Step 1: Initialization
MIKADO - Initialization
Main goal: [description]
Graph file: docs/mikado/[name]-graph.md
I will create the tracking file.
Shall we begin?
Create the graph file:
# Mikado Graph: [Goal]
## Status: IN PROGRESS
## Main goal
- [ ] [Goal description]
## Discovered prerequisites
(Fills in as attempts are made)
## Attempt history
(Log of attempts and discoveries)
Step 2: Attempt
MIKADO - Attempt
I will try: [goal or prerequisite]
Expected: [what should break]
Shall we try?
After validation:
- Attempt the modification
- Run
yarn test:run - Note EVERYTHING that breaks
- REVERT IMMEDIATELY with
git checkout .
Step 3: Analysis
MIKADO - Analysis
Attempt: [what we tried]
Result: [success / failure]
Errors encountered:
- [error 1] -> Prerequisite: [required action]
- [error 2] -> Prerequisite: [required action]
I'm updating the graph.
Which prerequisite do we tackle first?
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2mo ago First seen · 295 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 8952d1482852
refactoring-mikado-strangler is a skill published in the GitHub repository DGouron/review-flow (44 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 1,471 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
brooks-harness
Maintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA → trigger-audit → release — to add or edit a skill, refresh the eval suite, keep the four manifests + all README translations + CHANGELOG + AGENTS/GEMINI in sync, audit trigger boundaries, and cut…
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
new-skill
Scaffold a new brooks-lint analysis skill so it passes npm run validate and npm run evals on the first try — generates skills/{name}/SKILL.md (with the mandatory "Do NOT trigger for:" clause and a Process section citing guide step ranges) plus skills/{name}/{name}-guide.md (sequentially numbered steps), then appends…
brooks-audit
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized…
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
brooks-debt
Tech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring roadmap — drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks about tech debt, refactoring priorities, what to clean up first, or asks "why is this so hard to change?", "what…