# Refactoring Code

> Improve code structure while preserving behavior with test verification. Use when cleaning up code, reducing duplication, simplifying complexity, or reorganizing modules.

- Skill: `majiayu000/refactoring-code-2` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add majiayu000/refactoring-code-2`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/majiayu000/refactoring-code-2/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: majiayu000 (https://skillmd.com/u/majiayu000)
- Updated: 2026-09-09
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/majiayu000/refactoring-code-2

---


# Refactoring Code

You are following a systematic refactoring methodology that improves code quality, maintainability, and simplicity while **preserving existing behavior**.

**Core Principle:** Refactoring changes structure, not functionality. Safety and clarity are more important than elegance.

## The Iron Law

```
BEHAVIOR MUST BE PRESERVED
Tests must verify behavior, not implementation
```

If you change what the code does (not just how it does it), you're not refactoring—you're rewriting.

## Prerequisites

- Access to codebase for pattern research
- **Behavior-driven tests** that verify current functionality
- Understanding of project conventions

## Core Responsibilities

1. **Simplify Complex Code** - Break down complex functions, reduce nesting, improve readability
2. **Extract Patterns** - Identify and extract reusable components, hooks, utilities
3. **Eliminate Duplication** - Apply DRY principles while avoiding premature abstraction
4. **Improve Type Safety** - Strengthen TypeScript usage, eliminate `any` types when possible
5. **Performance Optimization** - Identify unnecessary re-renders, optimize data structures
6. **Align with Standards** - Ensure code follows project patterns and conventions

## The Five-Phase Refactoring Process

You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.

Copy this checklist and track your progress:

```
Refactoring Progress:
- [ ] Phase 1: Understand Current Behavior
  - [ ] Read existing code thoroughly
  - [ ] Check usage across codebase
  - [ ] Document current behavior
- [ ] Phase 2: Verify Test Coverage (CRITICAL)
  - [ ] Behavior-driven tests exist and pass
  - [ ] Tests cover main workflows and edge cases
  - [ ] Tests don't depend on implementation details
- [ ] Phase 3: Identify Issues
  - [ ] Issues documented with locations
  - [ ] Issues categorized by type and severity
  - [ ] Root cause understood for each issue
- [ ] Phase 4: Plan Refactoring
  - [ ] Broken into small, verifiable steps
  - [ ] Each step has verification criteria
  - [ ] Dependencies between steps identified
- [ ] Phase 5: Execute & Verify
  - [ ] All planned changes implemented
  - [ ] All tests pass
  - [ ] No new type errors or warnings
  - [ ] Behavior verified unchanged
```

### Phase 1: Understand Current Behavior

**Objective:** Know exactly what the code does before changing how it does it.

1. **Read existing code thoroughly**
   - Understand the purpose, not just the implementation
   - Identify inputs, outputs, and side effects
   - Note any edge cases or error handling

2. **Check usage across codebase**
   - Use Grep to find all call sites
   - Understand how consumers depend on this code
   - Identify any public APIs that must remain stable

3. **Document current behavior**
   - List what the code accomplishes
   - Note any implicit contracts or assumptions
   - Identify performance characteristics if relevant

**Phase 1 Complete When:**
- [ ] You can explain what the code does in plain language
- [ ] All call sites and dependencies are identified
- [ ] Current behavior is documented

### Phase 2: Verify Test Coverage (CRITICAL)

**Objective:** Ensure behavior-driven tests exist that will catch regressions.

**BEFORE refactoring, ensure tests verify BEHAVIOR (what users see/do), NOT implementation:**

✅ **Good - Behavior-driven tests:**
```typescript
// Tests user-observable behavior
test('displays error message when API returns 404', async () => {
  server.use(
    http.get('/api/users', () => new HttpResponse(null, { status: 404 }))
  );
  render(<UserList />);
  expect(await screen.findByText(/user not found/i)).toBeInTheDocument();
});
```

❌ **Bad - Implementation-detail tests:**
```typescript
// Tests internal state/functions - breaks during refactoring
test('sets error state when fetch fails', () => {
  const wrapper = shallow(<UserList />);
  wrapper.instance().handleError(new Error('404'));
  expect(wrapper.state('error')).toBe('404');
});
```

**Test Quality Checklist:**
- [ ] Tests verify user workflows, not function calls
- [ ] Tests use real dependencies (not mocks of components)
- [ ] Tests query by role/label/text, not internal state
- [ ] Tests will survive refactoring when behavior unchanged

**If tests are missing or test implementation details:**

1. **Add behavior-driven tests first** (see `writing-tests` skill)
2. Focus on user workflows, loading/error states, interactions
3. Ensure new tests are passing before refactoring

**Why this matters:** Unit tests checking internal state break during refactoring even when behavior is unchanged. Behavior-driven tests prove the feature works before and after.

**Phase 2 Complete When:**
- [ ] Behavior-driven tests exist and pass
- [ ] Tests cover main workflows and edge cases
- [ ] Tests don't depend on implementation details

### Phase 3: Identify Issues

**Objective:** Systematically catalog what needs improvement.

**Common refactoring opportunities:**

| Issue Type | Indicators | Impact |
|------------|-----------|---------|
| **Complexity** | Deep nesting (>3 levels), long functions (>50 lines), many parameters (>4) | Hard to understand, error-prone |
| **Duplication** | Copy-pasted code, repeated patterns, similar logic in multiple places | Maintenance burden, inconsistent fixes |
| **Poor Naming** | Unclear variables (`x`, `data`, `temp`), misleading names, inconsistent terminology | Cognitive overhead |
| **Type Safety Gaps** | `any` types, missing types, type assertions, implicit any | Runtime errors, poor IDE support |
| **Performance Issues** | Unnecessary re-renders, inefficient algorithms (O(n²) when O(n) possible), large bundle size | Slow UX, high resource usage |
| **Pattern Violations** | Inconsistent with project conventions, outdated patterns | Team confusion, tech debt |

**Analysis checklist:**
- [ ] Identify specific complexity hotspots
- [ ] Catalog duplicated code blocks
- [ ] List unclear or misleading names
- [ ] Find type safety vulnerabilities
- [ ] Measure performance bottlenecks (if applicable)
- [ ] Check against project conventions

**Phase 3 Complete When:**
- [ ] All issues are documented with locations
- [ ] Issues are categorized by type and severity
- [ ] You understand the root cause of each issue

### Phase 4: Plan Refactoring

**Objective:** Create a safe, incremental execution plan.

1. **Create todo list for multi-step refactorings** (use TodoWrite tool)
   - Break large refactorings into small, verifiable steps
   - Each step should be independently testable

2. **Prioritize changes by impact and risk**
   - High impact, low risk first (e.g., rename variables)
   - Defer high-risk changes (e.g., algorithm rewrites)

3. **Consider backward compatibility**
   - If this is a public API, can we deprecate gradually?
   - Do we need to support both old and new interfaces temporarily?

4. **Plan verification steps**
   - What will you check after each change?
   - Which tests must pass?

**Example refactoring breakdown:**

```markdown
**Large task:** Extract user authentication logic into reusable hook

**Breakdown:**
1. Create new hook file with basic structure
2. Move authentication state management to hook
3. Move login/logout handlers to hook
4. Extract token refresh logic
5. Replace inline logic in components with hook calls
6. Remove old duplicated code
7. Add tests for hook
```

**Phase 4 Complete When:**
- [ ] Refactoring is broken into small steps
- [ ] Each step has clear verification criteria
- [ ] Dependencies between steps are identified
- [ ] Risk mitigation strategies are planned

### Phase 5: Execute & Verify

**Objective:** Make changes safely with continuous verification.

**Execution principles:**

1. **Make one change at a time**
   - Single responsibility per edit
   - Commit frequently if using git

2. **Run tests after each change**
   - Don't accumulate untested changes
   - Catch regressions immediately

3. **Check TypeScript compilation**
   - `tsc --noEmit` or equivalent
   - Fix type errors before proceeding

4. **Verify behavior unchanged**
   - Run the application manually if needed
   - Confirm user-facing behavior is identical

**Verification checklist per step:**
- [ ] Tests pass (`npm test` or equivalent)
- [ ] TypeScript compiles without errors
- [ ] No new linting warnings
- [ ] Behavior manually verified (if high-risk change)

**If something breaks:**
- STOP immediately
- Use `systematic-debugging` skill to investigate
- Don't proceed until root cause is understood
- Consider reverting if fix is unclear

**Phase 5 Complete When:**
- [ ] All planned changes are implemented
- [ ] All tests pass
- [ ] No new type errors or warnings
- [ ] Code follows project conventions
- [ ] Behavior is verified unchanged

## Red Flags - STOP and Reassess

If you catch yourself:

- **Changing behavior while refactoring** → You're rewriting, not refactoring. Separate behavior changes from refactoring.
- **"I'll just skip the tests this time"** → Tests are your safety net. No tests = no safe refactoring.
- **Adding complexity to remove complexity** → Over-engineering. Simpler solution probably exists.
- **"This is clever!"** → Code should be clear, not clever. Clever code is hard to maintain.
- **Removing comments that explained context** → Comments explaining "why" are valuable. Keep them.
- **Breaking existing APIs without considering consumers** → Check all call sites. Plan deprecation if needed.
- **Abstracting before seeing pattern 3 times** → Rule of Three: Don't abstract until you see the pattern repeated three times.

**ALL of these mean: STOP. Reassess your approach.**

## React/TypeScript Patterns

For TypeScript/React projects, see [references/react-typescript.md](references/react-typescript.md) for component structure, type safety patterns, and refactoring checklists.

## Common Refactoring Patterns - Quick Reference

| Smell | Refactoring | Example |
|-------|-------------|---------|
| Long function | Extract smaller functions | Split 100-line function into 5 focused functions |
| Duplicate code | Extract to shared utility | Create `formatCurrency()` instead of inline formatting |
| Deep nesting | Early returns, guard clauses | Replace `if/else` pyramid with early returns |
| Magic numbers | Named constants | `const MAX_RETRIES = 3` instead of hardcoded `3` |
| Large component | Split into smaller components | Extract `<UserProfile>` from `<Dashboard>` |
| Complex condition | Extract to named function | `isEligibleForDiscount()` instead of `if (user.age > 65 && user.isPremium && ...)` |
| Primitive obsession | Create type/interface | `type Email = string` with validation instead of raw strings |
| Long parameter list | Parameter object | Pass `{ user, options, config }` instead of 8 parameters |

## Integration with Other Skills

**This skill requires using:**

- **writing-tests** - REQUIRED when adding behavior-driven tests before refactoring
- **systematic-debugging** - REQUIRED when refactoring breaks tests unexpectedly

**Complementary skills:**

- **verification-before-completion** - Use before claiming refactoring is complete
- **testing-anti-patterns** - Avoid when writing tests for refactored code

## When to Stop Refactoring

You've refactored enough when:

- ✅ Code is clear and easy to understand
- ✅ Duplication is eliminated (without over-abstraction)
- ✅ Types are explicit and safe
- ✅ Tests pass and coverage is maintained
- ✅ Code follows project conventions
- ✅ Team members can understand the code without explanation

**Don't refactor further if:**
- You're making code "elegant" but harder to understand
- You're abstracting before seeing the pattern 3 times
- You're refactoring code that works well and won't change soon
- You're optimizing performance without measuring first

## Communication

When proposing refactorings:

1. **Explain what problems you're solving**
   - "This function is 150 lines and does 5 different things"
   - Not just "This code could be better"

2. **Show before/after comparisons**
   - Demonstrate the improvement concretely
   - Highlight reduced complexity metrics

3. **Highlight risks and breaking changes**
   - "This changes the public API"
   - "Consumers will need to update imports"

4. **Suggest incremental steps for large refactorings**
   - "We can do this in 3 phases over 2 weeks"
   - Make large changes less scary

5. **Challenge your own assumptions**
   - "Is this really better, or just different?"
   - "Am I solving a real problem?"

## Key Principles Summary

1. **Preserve behavior** - Tests must verify same outcomes before and after
2. **Test first** - Behavior-driven tests are your safety net
3. **Small steps** - One change at a time, verify continuously
4. **Clarity over cleverness** - Code should be obvious, not impressive
5. **Rule of Three** - Don't abstract until you see the pattern three times
6. **Safety over elegance** - Working code is better than beautiful code

**Remember:** The goal of refactoring is to make future changes easier, not to make code perfect.