refactor-check

refactor-check is a skill for Claude Code from n24q02m/better-code-review-graph. It costs 24 tokens per session (977 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A pre-change safety check for refactoring, meaning restructuring code without intentionally changing its behavior. It examines dependencies, tests, public interfaces, and the likely blast radius—the parts of the system a change could affect.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before renaming symbols, changing interfaces, or reorganizing code to see what depends on the target and whether tests cover it.
Why use it?
It helps identify breakage risks before code is changed. The result includes a safety verdict and ways to reduce the risks found.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: argument-hint in frontmatter.

Part of the better-code-review-graph plugin — 7 skills, 3 hooks, 1 MCP server shipped together

Good fit Use it before renaming symbols, changing interfaces, or reorganizing code to see what depends on the target and whether tests cover it.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add n24q02m/better-code-review-graph --skill refactor-check
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install better-code-review-graph, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 7 skills, 3 hooks, 1 MCP server.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for refactor-check

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for refactor-check

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/refactor-check.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 24 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 977 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00024 $0.00977
Opus 5.5 $0.00010 $0.00391
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00005 $0.00195
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00098

Measured 1mo ago against content hash d12ca0aef337, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

refactor-check 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

skills/refactor-check/SKILL.md · 100 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Refactor Check

Analyze whether a refactoring is safe BEFORE making changes. Produces a verdict with specific risks and mitigation steps.

Command surface: run the local CLI through the coding harness shell. Examples use the installed better-code-review-graph command; from a source checkout, prefix it with uv run. No MCP mapping is required.

Steps

  1. Get the full dependency graph for the target:

    • better-code-review-graph graph build --base HEAD --repo-root "<path>" to index current working changes
    • better-code-review-graph query query --pattern callers_of --target "<name>" --repo-root "<path>" -- who calls this
    • use --pattern callees_of to see what this calls
    • use --pattern imports_of to see what this imports
    • If it is a class, also query --pattern inheritors_of and --pattern children_of
  2. Identify test coverage:

    • better-code-review-graph query query --pattern tests_for --target "<name>" --repo-root "<path>" -- direct tests
    • For each caller, also query tests_for to see if callers have integration tests covering this function indirectly
    • Record: number of direct tests, number of callers with tests, number of callers without tests
  3. Flag public API exposure:

    • Check if the target is exported from a package __init__.py, index.ts, or similar
    • Check if the target is referenced from outside its own module/package
    • Check if the target appears in documentation or type stubs
    • Public API = any function/class importable by external consumers
  4. Estimate blast radius:

    • better-code-review-graph query impact --changed-files "<target-file>" --repo-root "<path>" -- file-level impact analysis around the target
    • Count: total impacted files, total impacted functions, depth of dependency chain
    • Identify any impacted files outside the immediate package/module
  5. Produce verdict:

    ## Refactor Safety: <name>
    
    ### Target
    - **Location**: <file_path>:<line>
    - **Type**: function / class / method
    - **Public API**: Yes / No
    
    ### Dependency Summary
    - **Callers**: N functions depend on this
    - **Callees**: Calls M other functions
    - **Inheritance**: N subclasses (if class)
    
    ### Test Coverage
    - **Direct tests**: N tests
    - **Caller tests**: M/K callers have tests covering this path
    - **Coverage gaps**: <list uncovered callers>
    
    ### Blast Radius
    - **Impacted files**: N
    - **Impacted functions**: M
    - **Max depth**: K hops
    
    ### Verdict: SAFE / NEEDS MIGRATION / DANGEROUS
    
    **SAFE** -- Low blast radius (<5 files), good test coverage, no public API exposure.
    Make the change, run tests, done.
    
    **NEEDS MIGRATION** -- Public API or moderate blast radius (5-15 files).
    Recommended approach:
    1. Create new version alongside old
    2. Migrate callers incrementally
    3. Deprecate old version
    4. Remove after all callers migrated
    
    **DANGEROUS** -- High blast radius (>15 files), poor test coverage, or public API with external consumers.
    Specific risks:
    - <risk 1 with affected files>
    - <risk 2 with affected files>
    Mitigation: <steps to reduce risk before proceeding>
    

Read the full file on GitHub · 100 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 100 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A d12ca0aef337

Subscribe to this mod's changes

refactor-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository n24q02m/better-code-review-graph (67 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 977 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

browser-automation

Persistent Playwright browser daemon for QA testing, web interaction, and screenshots. Sub-200ms command latency via HTTP API.

trinhhaox/ag-kit · 29 tokens

api-design-implementation

Group skill: API design and implementation — decision, design, validation, auth, backend, testing, documentation, and monitoring.

may215/antigravity-awesome-group-skills · 30 tokens

code-review

Reviews Spec Kit code changes for consistency with applicable design documents, positive and negative test coverage, regression evidence for bug fixes, and consistent repository terminology. Use when reviewing a diff or pull request. Do not use for implementing changes or posting GitHub review actions.

github/spec-kit · 54 tokens

api-contract-testing

Design and review API contract tests across providers and consumers. Use for schema changes, compatibility regressions and client integration failures.

sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills · 28 tokens

api-testing-observability-api-mock

You are an API mocking expert specializing in realistic mock services for development, testing, and demos. Design mocks that simulate real API behavior and enable parallel development.

sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills · 40 tokens

mantis-plan

Formulates a targeted defensive security reviewing plan based on the active threat model and historical learnings. Use when starting a security review campaign to map the codebase boundaries and generate a roadmap (workspace/plan.json). Don't use for executing code reviews, writing test scripts, or patching code.

google/mantis · 62 tokens