Free SKILL.md scraped from GitHub. Clone the repo or copy the file directly into your Claude Code skills directory.
npx versuz@latest install yeachan-heo-oh-my-claudecode-skills-ai-slop-cleanergit clone https://github.com/Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode.gitcp oh-my-claudecode/SKILL.MD ~/.claude/skills/yeachan-heo-oh-my-claudecode-skills-ai-slop-cleaner/SKILL.md--- name: ai-slop-cleaner description: Clean AI-generated code slop with a regression-safe, deletion-first workflow and optional reviewer-only mode level: 3 --- # AI Slop Cleaner Use this skill to clean AI-generated code slop without drifting scope or changing intended behavior. In OMC, this is the bounded cleanup workflow for code that works but feels bloated, repetitive, weakly tested, or over-abstracted. ## When to Use Use this skill when: - the user explicitly says `deslop`, `anti-slop`, or `AI slop` - the request is to clean up or refactor code that feels noisy, repetitive, or overly abstract - follow-up implementation left duplicate logic, dead code, wrapper layers, boundary leaks, or weak regression coverage - the user wants a reviewer-only anti-slop pass via `--review` - the goal is simplification and cleanup, not new feature delivery ## When Not to Use Do not use this skill when: - the task is mainly a new feature build or product change - the user wants a broad redesign instead of an incremental cleanup pass - the request is a generic refactor with no simplification or anti-slop intent - behavior is too unclear to protect with tests or a concrete verification plan ## OMC Execution Posture - Preserve behavior unless the user explicitly asks for behavior changes. - Lock behavior with focused regression tests first whenever practical. - Write a cleanup plan before editing code. - Prefer deletion over addition. - Reuse existing utilities and patterns before introducing new ones. - Avoid new dependencies unless the user explicitly requests them. - Keep diffs small, reversible, and smell-focused. - Stay concise and evidence-dense: inspect, edit, verify, and report. - Treat new user instructions as local scope updates without dropping earlier non-conflicting constraints. ## Scoped File-List Usage This skill can be bounded to an explicit file list or changed-file scope when the caller already knows the safe cleanup surface. - Good fit: `oh-my-claudecode:ai-slop-cleaner skills/ralph/SKILL.md skills/ai-slop-cleaner/SKILL.md` - Good fit: a Ralph session handing off only the files changed in that session - Preserve the same regression-safe workflow even when the scope is a short file list - Do not silently expand a changed-file scope into broader cleanup work unless the user explicitly asks for it ## Ralph Integration Ralph can invoke this skill as a bounded post-review cleanup pass. - In that workflow, the cleaner runs in standard mode (not `--review`) - The cleanup scope is the Ralph session's changed files only - After the cleanup pass, Ralph re-runs regression verification before completion - `--review` remains the reviewer-only follow-up mode, not the default Ralph integration path ## Review Mode (`--review`) `--review` is a reviewer-only pass after cleanup work is drafted. It exists to preserve explicit writer/reviewer separation for anti-slop work. - **Writer pass**: make the cleanup changes with behavior locked by tests. - **Reviewer pass**: inspect the cleanup plan, changed files, and verification evidence. - The same pass must not both write and self-approve high-impact cleanup without a separate review step. In review mode: 1. Do **not** start by editing files. 2. Review the cleanup plan, changed files, and regression coverage. 3. Check specifically for: - leftover dead code or unused exports - duplicate logic that should have been consolidated - needless wrappers or abstractions that still blur boundaries - missing tests or weak verification for preserved behavior - cleanup that appears to have changed behavior without intent 4. Produce a reviewer verdict with required follow-ups. 5. Hand needed changes back to a separate writer pass instead of fixing and approving in one step. ## Workflow 1. **Protect current behavior first** - Identify what must stay the same. - Add or run the narrowest regression tests needed before editing. - If tests cannot come first, record the verification plan explicitly before touching code. 2. **Write a cleanup plan before code** - Bound the pass to the requested files or feature area. - List the concrete smells to remove. - Order the work from safest deletion to riskier consolidation. 3. **Classify the slop before editing** - **Duplication** — repeated logic, copy-paste branches, redundant helpers - **Dead code** — unused code, unreachable branches, stale flags, debug leftovers - **Needless abstraction** — pass-through wrappers, speculative indirection, single-use helper layers - **Boundary violations** — hidden coupling, misplaced responsibilities, wrong-layer imports or side effects - **Missing tests** — behavior not locked, weak regression coverage, edge-case gaps - **UI/design defaults** — generic visual patterns that make an AI-built interface feel unreviewed ### UI/Design Reviewer Checklist Use these as review prompts, not absolute bans. Keep intentional brand, accessibility, product-density, or design-system choices when they have a clear rationale. - **Korean readability:** flag body text set around 11-12px; Korean body copy generally needs at least 14px unless a validated dense-data exception applies. - **Shadow restraint:** question box shadows on every surface, logo, background, card, or icon; keep shadows only where they clarify elevation or interaction. - **Content hierarchy:** remove repetitive eyebrow/title/description/extra `<p>` stuffing when the title already carries the message; avoid generic emoji badges unless they are part of the product voice. - **Palette rationale:** challenge default AI blue/purple palettes, especially Tailwind-like `#3B82F6`, when no brand or system rationale exists. - **Layout rhythm:** avoid overly perfect 3- or 4-column uniform grids when the product context benefits from rhythm, emphasis, asymmetry, carousel/bento treatment, or varied card weights. - **Gradient restraint:** tone down extreme gradients unless the brand deliberately owns that visual language. 4. **Run one smell-focused pass at a time** - **Pass 1: Dead code deletion** - **Pass 2: Duplicate removal** - **Pass 3: Naming and error-handling cleanup** - **Pass 4: Test reinforcement** - Re-run targeted verification after each pass. - Do not bundle unrelated refactors into the same edit set. 5. **Run the quality gates** - Keep regression tests green. - Run the relevant lint, typecheck, and unit/integration tests for the touched area. - Run existing static or security checks when available. - If a gate fails, fix the issue or back out the risky cleanup instead of forcing it through. 6. **Close with an evidence-dense report** Always report: - **Changed files** - **Simplifications** - **Behavior lock / verification run** - **Remaining risks** ## Usage - `/oh-my-claudecode:ai-slop-cleaner <target>` - `/oh-my-claudecode:ai-slop-cleaner <target> --review` - `/oh-my-claudecode:ai-slop-cleaner <file-a> <file-b> <file-c>` - From Ralph: run the cleaner on the Ralph session's changed files only, then return to Ralph for post-cleanup regression verification ## Good Fits **Good:** `deslop this module: too many wrappers, duplicate helpers, and dead code` **Good:** `cleanup the AI slop in src/auth and tighten boundaries without changing behavior` **Bad:** `refactor auth to support SSO` **Bad:** `clean up formatting`