Guardrail refactor
Skill mustafa3252/vibe-ship-skills/skills/guardrail-refactor
Practical agent skills for vibe coders: move fast, verify faster, ship cleaner.
npx -y skills add mustafa3252/vibe-ship-skills --skill guardrail-refactorAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Refactor quickly while protecting behavior, public APIs, and obvious security boundaries.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
1.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Guardrail Refactor
What this skill does
Refactor quickly while protecting behavior, public APIs, and obvious security boundaries.
Use it when you want AI speed without the usual vibe-coding tax: vague scope, broken demos, missing tests, or code that looks done but cannot ship.
Operating mode
- Name the outcome — one sentence, user-visible, demoable.
- List constraints — stack, files to avoid, style, deadline, and non-goals.
- Create a tiny proof loop — test, script, screenshot, curl command, or manual checklist.
- Build one vertical slice — no speculative framework work.
- Verify out loud — report the exact command or evidence that proves the slice works.
Prompt template
Use the Guardrail Refactor skill.
Goal: <what I want built or improved>
Context: <repo/app/user/problem>
Constraints: <stack, files, time, style>
Done means: <observable proof>
Do not: <scope traps or risky changes>
Anti-patterns this skill blocks
- Starting with a folder explosion instead of a working slice.
- Accepting generated code without a verification loop.
- Rewriting the app to fix one small issue.
- Shipping a README claim that no command has proven.
- Letting the agent hide uncertainty behind confident prose.
Done checklist
- The request has a one-line success condition.
- The agent knows what not to change.
- There is at least one concrete verification step.
- The final answer includes evidence, not vibes.
Part of Vibe Coder Skills by Mustafa — Instagram: @mustafaiscoding, X/Twitter: @mustafa30.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most refactoring skills give
Counted across 521 of the 525 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- run tests after each changein 59 of 521, across 56 files
- write tests before refactoringin 27 of 521, across 24 files
- preserve external behaviorin 26 of 521, across 22 files
- remove dead codein 25 of 521, across 24 files
- make small incremental changesin 20 of 521, across 17 files
- break the implementation into tiny commitsin 18 of 521, across 5 files
- ask the user about alternative optionsin 17 of 521, across 4 files
- create a GitHub issue with the planin 17 of 521, across 4 files
- explore the repository to verify assertionsin 17 of 521, across 4 files
- interview the user about the refactorin 16 of 521, across 3 files
- check the codebase for test coveragein 16 of 521, across 3 files
- refactor one thing at a timein 16 of 521, across 12 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Define a one-sentence user-visible outcome
- List project constraints and non-goals
- Create a small proof loop
- Build one vertical slice
- Report exact evidence proving the slice works
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.