claude/skills/polish-code/SKILL.md
Stage, format, lint, test, review, smoke test, and re-run itself until stable. Use when the user asks to "polish code", "refine code", "iterate on code quality", "review loop", "clean up, test, and review loop", or "run the polish loop".
npx skillsauth add tobihagemann/turbo polish-codeInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
At the start of every invocation (including re-runs from Step 7), use TaskCreate to create a task for each step:
/stage skill/review-code skill/evaluate-findings skill/apply-findings skill/smoke-test skill/polish-code skill if changed/stage SkillRun the /stage skill.
Run the project's full verification gate: every check it defines as a pass/fail condition. The goal is that passing this step means the project's own checks (and CI, where it exists) pass. Build the gate by combining every source below that the project declares (sources 1-3); run the baseline (source 4) only when the project declares none of them:
check, verify, lint, typecheck), Makefile or Taskfile targets, or a combined format+lint script./find-dead-code.Run the formatter first so later checks see formatted code, then the rest. Fix any failure the tools do not auto-resolve. For test failures, run the /investigate skill to diagnose the root cause, apply the suggested fix, and re-run; if investigation finds no root cause, stop and report with its findings.
Stage all changes made in this step before continuing.
/review-code SkillRun the /review-code skill on the staged changes. The diff command is git diff --cached.
/evaluate-findings SkillRun the /evaluate-findings skill on the results from Step 3.
/apply-findings SkillRun the /apply-findings skill on the evaluated results.
Stage all changes made in this step before continuing.
/smoke-test SkillRun the /smoke-test skill to produce the smoke test plan.
Capture git status --short and git diff HEAD | git hash-object --stdin before spawning.
Delegate test execution to a subagent using the Agent tool in the foreground (model: "opus", no name). Pass the plan and the diff command (git diff --cached) to the subagent.
Verify the tree: re-run both commands when the subagent returns, including when it terminates early or reports incomplete results. Delete what the subagent created and revert what it modified or staged, leaving everything the pre-spawn capture already showed untouched.
If any test fails, fix the issues and stage the fixes.
/polish-code Skill if ChangedCheck whether any file was edited during Steps 5-6. Any edit counts.
The iteration number below refers to the /polish-code run currently executing Step 7. It is not the iteration number of a prospective re-run. Iteration 1 is the initial run; iteration 2 is the first auto-re-run; iteration 3 is the second auto-re-run; iteration 4 and beyond exist only when the user opts in at the hard-cap ask. Iterations 1 and 2 always follow the classification gate (they never trigger the hard cap at their own Step 7, even when the auto-re-run they spawn would be iteration 3). The hard cap fires at the end of iteration 3 and every iteration thereafter.
Iterations 1 and 2, if changes were made, classify what Steps 5-6 edited:
/polish-code again using the Skill tool. Scope the diff command to only the files modified in Steps 5-6: use git diff --cached -- <file1> <file2> ... as the diff command for /review-code. Smoke test scope remains unchanged (full feature scope, not file-narrowed). If the round contains both structural and in-place edits, treat it as structural and re-run automatically.AskUserQuestion to ask whether to run one more round or stop here. Do not silently continue or silently stop.Iterations 1 and 2, if changes were made but you believe re-running is unnecessary, use AskUserQuestion to ask for skip permission. Do not skip silently.
Judge whether another round is worthwhile by the trend across iterations: when rounds have stopped surfacing defects (wrong behavior, security exposures, broken contracts) and keep surfacing improvements of kinds earlier rounds already applied, the loop has converged even though the edits were structural — recommend stopping. A round that surfaces no defects is the termination signal; never add a confirmation round, an extra reviewer, or review steps beyond this skill's own.
Iteration 3 or later, if Steps 5-6 of this run made changes, the hard cap is reached. This replaces the classification gate above for iteration 3 and every iteration after it. Output a summary of what is still changing and whether it is structural or in-place. Then use AskUserQuestion to offer three options: continue for another iteration, stop here and accept the current state, or escalate to /consult-oracle for a different perspective on the remaining issues.
When the same class of defect recurs across iterations, stop patching the individual instance and instead encode the root-cause invariant structurally — a shared guard or type, or a regression test that pins the class against the worked failures it must prevent. In the same pass, audit the existing code against the newly encoded invariant and fix every instance it catches, including code written before it existed. Treat recurrence on a new axis of the same invariant as a signal that the invariant is incomplete: widen it to cover the new axis rather than assuming the latest fix failed.
The re-invocation is a full, fresh run of this skill. Every step (1-7) executes with its own task tracking and skill invocations. "Scoped to modified files" only affects the diff command passed to /review-code. It does not affect which steps run or whether skills are invoked.
Then use the TaskList tool and proceed to any remaining task.
/review-code covers correctness, security, consistency, API usage, coverage, and simplicity across parallel internal reviewers plus peer review. /evaluate-findings is a judgment gate that must run before /apply-findings.development
Apply a UX lens to a user-facing change: whether it serves the user's real goal and whether the path through it holds together, using the Understanding, Bridging, and Flowing contexts. Use when scoping, planning, or assessing any change that affects what a user sees or does. Loaded as a lens during planning and assessment.
development
Apply a UX lens to a user-facing change: whether it serves the user's real goal and whether the path through it holds together, using the Understanding, Bridging, and Flowing contexts. Use when scoping, planning, or assessing any change that affects what a user sees or does. Loaded as a lens during planning and assessment.
development
Assess project-wide structural technical debt: complexity hotspots, deprecated API usage, duplication clusters, and architecture rot. Ranks findings by impact and refactor effort into a report at .turbo/technical-debt.md. Use when the user asks to "assess technical debt", "find technical debt", "review technical debt", "what should we refactor", "find refactoring candidates", "where is the code rot", or "what's our worst code". Analysis-only — does not modify code.
development
Run a multi-agent review of code comments and markdown documentation for unnecessary content, then fix the issues. Covers what-restating comments, name-mirroring doc comments, status-update prose, and other documentation noise. Use when the user asks to "simplify docs", "simplify documentation", "clean up comments", "clean up docs", "review documentation", "strip unnecessary comments", "reduce doc noise", or "run simplify-docs".