Install
$ agentstack add skill-jonisavo-supersigil-ss-refactoring ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Refactoring
Use this skill when specs exist, tests pass, and the goal is to change code structure without changing behavior. The spec graph is the behavioral contract — it must stay green throughout.
Current Contract
Use the current CLI as the source of truth:
supersigil status [--format json]
supersigil plan [] [--format json]
supersigil context [--format json]
supersigil verify [--format terminal|json|markdown]
supersigil affected --since [--format json]
supersigil verify
If the spec graph is missing, broken, or incomplete for the area being refactored, stop and hand the job to ss-retroactive-specification or ss-feature-specification first. Do not refactor code that has no behavioral contract.
Workflow
- Establish the refactoring boundary.
Confirm with the user which module, subsystem, or code area is being restructured and what the structural goal is (extract module, rename abstraction, flatten hierarchy, etc.). Do not expand the boundary during the refactoring.
- Snapshot the current verification state.
Run supersigil verify and supersigil status for all docs in the affected area. Record the current state: which criteria are covered, which tasks are done, which findings exist. This is the baseline — the refactoring must not make it worse.
- Run all tests before changing anything.
Confirm the test suite passes. If tests fail before the refactoring starts, that is a bug, not a refactoring problem. Stop and address it separately.
- Make structural changes in small, verifiable steps.
Move files, rename modules, extract types, reorganize imports — one logical change at a time. After each step, run the test suite to confirm behavior is preserved.
- Update spec artifacts that reference moved code.
After structural changes, update:
- `` when source paths changed.
- `` when test file
paths changed.
supersigil: {tag}comments if they moved to new files (tags
themselves should not change). Run supersigil verify after each spec edit.
- Do not change criteria, requirements, or design intent.
The refactoring skill changes code structure and spec plumbing (paths, globs, tracked files). It does not change what the system does or what the specs say it should do. If the refactoring reveals that a criterion is wrong or missing, stop the refactoring for that area and hand it to ss-feature-specification.
- Verify the refactoring preserved the contract.
Run supersigil verify and compare against the baseline snapshot. The refactoring is complete when:
- All tests still pass.
verifyfindings are the same or better than the baseline.- No new coverage gaps were introduced.
supersigil affected --since HEADshows only the docs you
intentionally updated.
- End with a concrete summary.
Report what structural changes were made, which spec artifacts were updated (paths, globs, tracked files), and confirm the verification state matches or improves on the baseline.
Authoring Rules
- Do not change criterion IDs, document IDs, or task IDs during a
refactoring. These are stable references that other documents depend on.
- Do not change document statuses during a refactoring unless the
refactoring itself was the last remaining task for a status promotion.
- Update
TrackedFilesandVerifiedBypaths to reflect the new
file locations. Use supersigil affected --since HEAD to find docs that need path updates.
- Keep
supersigil: {tag}comment tags stable even when moving test
files. The tag is the stable identifier; the file location is not.
Failure Modes
- Do not refactor code that has no specs. Create specs first.
- Do not change behavior during a refactoring. If behavior needs to
change, that is a feature or bugfix, not a refactoring.
- Do not leave broken
TrackedFilesorVerifiedBypaths behind.
verify will catch stale globs — fix them before claiming done.
- Do not skip the baseline snapshot. Without it, you cannot prove the
refactoring preserved the contract.
Handoff
If the refactoring reveals missing specs, suggest ss-retroactive-specification or ss-feature-specification. If the refactoring is preparation for a new feature, suggest ss-spec-driven-development or ss-feature-development for the next phase. If the user wants to continue with more structural changes, stay in this skill for the next bounded refactoring.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: jonisavo
- Source: jonisavo/supersigil
- License: Apache-2.0
- Homepage: https://supersigil.org
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.