Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to marcoemrich/EXACT-Coding-Exercises. 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/marcoemrich/EXACT-Coding-Exercises/main/.claude/skills/refactor/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marcoemrich/EXACT-Coding-ExercisesWrote 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/marcoemrich/exact-coding-exercises/refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marcoemrich/exact-coding-exercises/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoemrich/exact-coding-exercises/refactor/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/marcoemrich/exact-coding-exercises/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoemrich/exact-coding-exercises/refactor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00086 | $0.00677 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00271 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00135 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 1mo 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 — 55 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor — one phase, manually driven
This is a manual phase control, not a separate method. It runs step 4 of the predictive cycle and then stops. Use it when you want to steer Red-Green-Refactor yourself instead of invoking the whole
exact-codingworkflow. The method lives in one place; this skill only selects which part of it to execute now.For a measured cleanup pass over the whole finished tree rather than one green step, use
end-refactorinstead.
What to read
.claude/skills/predictive-tdd/SKILL.md— section 4. Inspect and refactor, including Domain responsibility review and the Mandatory domain-boundary trial. That section is binding as written, with its before/after records.- The matching profile under
.claude/skills/predictive-tdd/stacks/for language- and framework-specific application guidance only. .claude/skills/exact-coding-shared/human-in-the-loop.mdfor the Refactor checkpoint and the prediction-mismatch rule.
What to do
First verify the behavior tests are green and say so. Refactoring on red is not
permitted by the Core rules; if anything fails, stop and offer green instead.
Then execute exactly step 4 of the cycle as written in the Predictive TDD
skill: the Four Rules review in order, the domain-responsibility review, and the
domain-boundary trial with its recorded Domain responsibility /
Independent change axes / Boundary candidate and Boundary outcome /
Semantic change / Fewest Elements check blocks. Analysis alone is not the
attempt — when a credible seam exists, try the structural change and keep or undo
it on the evidence.
Make at most one refactoring at a time and predict and run the smallest relevant check after each.
Both refactor profiles ship in this tree. If the human named the isolated profile, delegate the review through the Agent tool with subagent_type: refactor and verify Green before applying the checkpoint yourself; otherwise refactor inline in this context.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 55 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 0e30b021ce5d
refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository marcoemrich/EXACT-Coding-Exercises (18 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 677 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-20.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
principle-test-behavior-not-implementation
Apply when you write, change, or keep a test. Assert what the code's users can observe, so that the test fails when that behavior breaks and keeps passing when only the internals change.
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.
tdd
This skill should be used when the user wants to implement features or fix bugs using test-driven development. Enforces the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle with vertical slicing, context isolation between test writing and implementation, human checkpoints, and auto-test feedback loops. Uses multi-agent orchestration with the…
mobiai-mobile-tdd
You MUST use this before writing any implementation code for a mobile feature, bug fix, refactor, or behavior change. Tests come before implementation — no exceptions.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.