Chisle Audit
Scan the target (a diff, a file, or the repo tree) and report what to cut, on
both axes. One-shot. Read-only: never edit, never write a flag, never apply fixes.
Scope
- No argument → audit the current
git diff (staged + unstaged). Empty diff → audit HEAD~1..HEAD.
- A path → audit that file or directory.
- "repo" / "whole repo" → walk the tree (skip vendored/generated/
node_modules/dist/lockfiles).
What to flag
Code (the YAGNI axis):
- Reinvented stdlib (hand-rolled debounce, deep-clone, groupBy, retry loop, date math)
- Abstraction with one implementation (interface/factory/wrapper for a single case)
- New dependency for what a few lines or an installed dep already covers
- Config/option/flag that never varies
- Speculative "for later" scaffolding with no current caller
- Verbose code where a native platform feature (CSS, DB constraint,
<input type>) does it
Prose (the compression axis), the half a code-only auditor misses:
- Comments that restate the code (
i += 1 // increment i)
- Docstrings/READMEs padded with filler, hedging, ceremony, or duplicated content
- Multi-paragraph explanations where one tight sentence carries the meaning
- Decorative tables/emoji/headings that add tokens, not information
- Dead prose: TODO graveyards, stale "see also" links, obsolete sections
What NOT to flag
Input validation at trust boundaries, error handling that prevents data loss,
security, accessibility, deliberate // chisle: / // ponytail: shortcuts already
documented, or domain comments that explain why (not what).
Output
One ranked list, biggest cut first. One finding per line. No preamble, no praise.
path:line [code|prose] <what's bloated> → <the lean replacement>. (~N lines/tokens)
End with a two-line summary:
N findings: X code, Y prose. Est. removable: ~A lines code, ~B lines prose.
Biggest win: <the single highest-impact cut>.
Be honest about uncertainty: mark a finding (check) if cutting it might lose
behavior you can't verify from the snippet. Lean toward fewer, high-confidence
findings over a long speculative list.
1---2name: chisle-audit3description: One-shot efficiency audit of a file, diff, or whole repo across BOTH axes at once: over-engineered code (reinvented stdlib, needless abstractions, speculative config) AND bloated prose (verbose comments, padded docstrings, redundant doc sections). Neither a pure code-minimizer nor a pure prose compressor does both in one pass. That's the point. Ranked report, biggest saving first; changes nothing. Use when the user says "chisle audit", "/chisle-audit", "audit this for bloat", "what can I cut", "review this PR for over-engineering and verbosity".4---56# Chisle Audit78Scan the target (a diff, a file, or the repo tree) and report what to cut, on9both axes. One-shot. Read-only: never edit, never write a flag, never apply fixes.1011## Scope1213- No argument → audit the current `git diff` (staged + unstaged). Empty diff → audit `HEAD~1..HEAD`.14- A path → audit that file or directory.15- "repo" / "whole repo" → walk the tree (skip vendored/generated/`node_modules`/`dist`/lockfiles).1617## What to flag1819**Code (the YAGNI axis):**20- Reinvented stdlib (hand-rolled debounce, deep-clone, groupBy, retry loop, date math)21- Abstraction with one implementation (interface/factory/wrapper for a single case)22- New dependency for what a few lines or an installed dep already covers23- Config/option/flag that never varies24- Speculative "for later" scaffolding with no current caller25- Verbose code where a native platform feature (CSS, DB constraint, `<input type>`) does it2627**Prose (the compression axis), the half a code-only auditor misses:**28- Comments that restate the code (`i += 1 // increment i`)29- Docstrings/READMEs padded with filler, hedging, ceremony, or duplicated content30- Multi-paragraph explanations where one tight sentence carries the meaning31- Decorative tables/emoji/headings that add tokens, not information32- Dead prose: TODO graveyards, stale "see also" links, obsolete sections3334## What NOT to flag3536Input validation at trust boundaries, error handling that prevents data loss,37security, accessibility, deliberate `// chisle:` / `// ponytail:` shortcuts already38documented, or domain comments that explain *why* (not *what*).3940## Output4142One ranked list, biggest cut first. One finding per line. No preamble, no praise.4344```45path:line [code|prose] <what's bloated> → <the lean replacement>. (~N lines/tokens)46```4748End with a two-line summary:4950```51N findings: X code, Y prose. Est. removable: ~A lines code, ~B lines prose.52Biggest win: <the single highest-impact cut>.53```5455Be honest about uncertainty: mark a finding `(check)` if cutting it might lose56behavior you can't verify from the snippet. Lean toward fewer, high-confidence57findings over a long speculative list.
JayPokale