AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Make Improvement

skill-tale-project-tale-make-improvement · by tale-project

Use this skill whenever you change existing code WITHOUT changing its behaviour — refactor, optimize, simplify, deduplicate, rename, restructure, extract, or pay down tech debt. It keeps you green while you move and locks behaviour with tests first. Load it the moment a task says "clean up", "refactor", "simplify", "make faster", "extract", "consolidate", or "merge", or whenever you're tempted to…

No reviews yet
0 installs
36 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-tale-project-tale-make-improvement

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No 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.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-tale-project-tale-make-improvement)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
2mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

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 →
Are you the author of Make Improvement? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

make-improvement

Change the structure, not the behaviour. The entire discipline is staying green while you move: an "improvement" that quietly changes what the code does is a bug you shipped on purpose. The thing you're improving almost always is an existing concept, so Gate A here is mostly find it and lock it down. For new behaviour use implement-feature; for a defect use fix-bug; to open the PR, create-pr.

When this applies

Refactors, performance work, readability cleanups, renames, extracting or consolidating shared code, and tech-debt paydown — any change whose success is defined by "behaves exactly the same, but better".

Write a note first

Invoke write-notes and record your answers to this form before you change anything:

  • Goal: Describe what will improve (structure / performance / clarity) and the exact behaviour that must stay identical.
  • Current shape: Walk through how the code works today — trace the path you'll restructure and name its callers.
  • The concept: Describe the duplication you're collapsing or the primitive you're extracting, and where the single canonical version will live.
  • Safety net: Describe how you've pinned today's behaviour — which test covers it, or the characterization test you wrote and watched pass first.
  • Baseline: For a performance change, describe what you measured and the number you'll compare against.
  • Risks & unknowns: What behaviour might you change by accident? Describe where you're least confident and how you'd notice a regression.

Gate A — before you change anything

Tick every box before the first edit — you have not earned the right to refactor until they hold:

  • [ ] Stated what you're improving and why — the goal is structure / performance / clarity,

explicitly not new behaviour. If "improve" hides a feature or a fix, split it into its own change and commit.

  • [ ] Felt the status quo — and measured it. You know exactly what the code does today; for a

performance change you baselined it first (no speedup claim without a before-number).

  • [ ] Found the existing concept you're consolidating or extracting to — improving turns two

divergent copies into one canonical one, never adds a third.

  • [ ] Discovered the house conventions from the tooling and the neighbours, so the improved code

still matches the project and passes its gate.

  • [ ] Locked behaviour with a passing test first. If the code wasn't covered, you wrote the

characterization test, watched it pass, and only then refactored — your safety net for every step.

  • [ ] Mapped the blast radius — every caller of what you're restructuring.

Do the work in reversible steps

  • Small steps, green throughout. Move in increments that each keep the suite passing; commit each

coherent step so any one is trivially revertible.

  • Never fold in a feature or a fix. Spot a bug mid-refactor? Note it and handle it separately — a

mixed commit is impossible to review or revert cleanly.

  • For performance: one change, re-measure, keep what the numbers justify. Don't stack speculative

optimizations; prove each.

Gate B — before you call it done

Tick every box, or mark it N/A with a reason. An unticked box means not done.

  • [ ] Behaviour is unchanged — the locking tests still pass, untouched.
  • [ ] Performance claims are backed by before/after numbers, not vibes (or N/A).
  • [ ] Reuse is actually achieved — the duplication is gone, not relocated.
  • [ ] Docs and comments that described the old structure are updated — no stale "why".
  • [ ] The gate is green — the project's format/lint/typecheck/test command passes.

Then take it to a clean PR with create-pr.

Patterns

  • Refactor or feature — never both in one commit. The mix is the single most common way a

"harmless cleanup" ships a regression.

  • Make it work, make it right, make it fast — in that order, proving each with the suite before

the next.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.