large-file-refactor

# Large File Refactor This skill is coordination-exempt: skip the ai-coord gate for its declared work. If a slash or dollar invocation already added these instructions to the conversation, follow them directly. In that case, do not invoke this skill again through a skill tool. Use LOC thresholds to discover candidates, then decide whether a split is justified by cohesion, coupling, ownership, and change risk. Source files match above 1000 LOC. Test files use a relaxed 2000 LOC discovery threshold. ## Arguments - `path`: Optional file or directory to scan. Default: current working directory. - `--include-generated`: Include generated, vendored, dependency, and build-output paths that are skipped by default. ## Workflow 1. Resolve the skill directory, then run the helper from the target repository: ```sh uv run "<skill-dir>/scripts/large-file-refactor.py" [path] [--include-generated] ``` 2. Preserve the helper's Markdown table as the exhaustive report. Do not omit matching rows, even when the refactor plan only covers a subset. 3. If the helper reports no threshold matches, stop after the report. A match is a candidate, not proof that the file should be split. 4. Draft a refactor plan for the 3 largest files only, unless the user explicitly requested another count. 5. For each candidate, rank split value by mixed responsibilities, change frequency/risk, coupling, and testability. Use whichever semantic symbol/reference tooling is available. When Serena is installed, prefer it: - Inspect symbol overviews, references, imports, and relevant history. - Use the evidence to choose extraction boundaries, target module names, migration order, and test coverage. 6. This workflow defaults to a report and plan. Implement only when the user's request already authorizes execution or the user subsequently approves it. Do not require a separate request for an unchanged, already authorized outcome. ## Refactor Plan Format For each selected file, include: - Current role: the file's apparent responsibility and why line count is a symptom. - Semantic pass: the exact symbol/reference/history inspection to run before moving code. - Split proposal: 2-5 target modules or files with responsibilities. - Migration order: small, reviewable steps that preserve public behavior. - Verification: narrow tests, type checks, builds, or smoke checks that prove the split. Lead each plan with one explicit verdict: `### ✂ Split justified`, `### 🧱 Keep intact`, or `### ⚠️ Generated — change the generator`. Use a compact evidence table for repeated criteria. When proposing a split, show the source and target modules as a tree only when it clarifies ownership. If a selected file is generated or vendored because `--include-generated` was used, plan against the generator, schema, or upstream source instead of hand-splitting generated output. ## Guard Rails - Treat the table as the source of truth for size ranking only. Rank refactor priority separately. - Keep the plan cohesive. Do not split solely to reduce line count. - Prefer existing project module boundaries and naming conventions. - Report when the helper used its portable LOC estimate instead of `tokei`. ## Completion Complete with the exhaustive threshold report plus evidence-ranked plans only for candidates whose cohesion or change risk justifies a split. Lead with `### 🔎 Large-file scan — <candidate count>`, state when a large file should remain intact and why, and surface the portable-LOC fallback as `⚠️ Approximate counts` when used. Keep the helper's exhaustive table, paths, LOC values, and commands exact and undecorated.