Audit and improve the Claude Code context layer — CLAUDE.md guidance files, .claude/rules/ path-scoped rules, and companion code_map.md navigation maps — against Claude 5 context-engineering rules (judgement over rules, progressive disclosure, no cross-layer conflicts). Asks whether to optimize the current repository (default) or the global ~/.claude context. Use when the user asks to check, audit, optimize, rightsize, slim, or restructure CLAUDE.md or Claude context files, mentions nested CLAUDE.md, code_map.md, or context engineering, or says 优化 CLAUDE.md, 审计 CLAUDE.md, 优化上下文, 精简上下文, 生成 code_map (Claude). Not for trivial single-line edits the user has already fully specified.
Instrucciones de origen · Vista previa de solo lectura
name
claude-context-improver
description
Audit and improve the Claude Code context layer — CLAUDE.md guidance files, .claude/rules/ path-scoped rules, and companion code_map.md navigation maps — against Claude 5 context-engineering rules (judgement over rules, progressive disclosure, no cross-layer conflicts). Asks whether to optimize the current repository (default) or the global ~/.claude context. Use when the user asks to check, audit, optimize, rightsize, slim, or restructure CLAUDE.md or Claude context files, mentions nested CLAUDE.md, code_map.md, or context engineering, or says 优化 CLAUDE.md, 审计 CLAUDE.md, 优化上下文, 精简上下文, 生成 code_map (Claude). Not for trivial single-line edits the user has already fully specified.
Audit and improve the context Claude Code loads before it sees a prompt: CLAUDE.md guidance files, .claude/rules/ path-scoped rules, and the companion code_map.md navigation map. The goal is a context layer that is concise, current, conflict-free, and progressively disclosed — sized for Claude 5 generation models rather than for the weaker models most existing guidance was written against.
Default mode is report-first. Output a quality report and proposed diff before writing. If the user explicitly asks to implement an approved plan, continue directly to targeted edits and verification.
Relationship to /doctor. Claude Code's bundled /doctor is Anthropic's automated rightsizer for skills and CLAUDE.md. This skill is the repo-tailored, report-first companion: it scores against a rubric, verifies claims against the actual codebase, covers code_map.md and .claude/rules/, and shows diffs before editing. Recommending a /doctor run alongside the report is reasonable; neither replaces the other.
Trivial edit fast path. If the request is a single scoped edit the user has already specified (add or fix one line or one small section in an identified file), skip the scope question and the full workflow: apply the edit directly, checking only that hook marker blocks stay intact, the file stays under the 200-line target, and no @code_map.md import is introduced. Everything below applies to audit and optimization requests.
Context Engineering Principles (Claude 5)
Anthropic removed over 80% of Claude Code's system prompt for Claude Opus 5 and Fable 5 with no measurable loss on coding evals. The same over-constraining that hobbled the system prompt hobbles most CLAUDE.md files. Audit against these shifts:
Then
Now
Give Claude rules
Let Claude use judgement — phrase intent, reserve absolutes for expensive mistakes
Give Claude examples
Design interfaces — expressive parameters and contracts beat example walls that narrow the space
Put it all upfront
Progressive disclosure — a tree of files loaded at the right time, not one central repository
Repeat yourself
Say it once, in the layer that owns it
Memory in CLAUDE.md
Auto-memory — session facts and decisions are saved automatically, not pasted into guidance
Simple specs
Rich references — specs-as-code, test suites, HTML artifacts, and rubrics beat restated prose
The one-line summary from the official guidance: keep CLAUDE.md lightweight, briefly say what the repo is for, and spend most of the tokens on gotchas — never on what Claude can see by reading the file tree.
See references/context-engineering-claude5.md for the full rules, sources, and how each shift maps to a concrete audit check.
Core Semantics
Claude Code memory files use additive layering, not directory-scoped override. This is the most common point of confusion when migrating instructions from Codex AGENTS.md or other agents.
Claude Code walks up the directory tree from the current working directory; every CLAUDE.md and CLAUDE.local.md found along the way is loaded at session start and concatenated into context, ordered from filesystem root to working directory.
CLAUDE.md files in descendant directories are loaded lazily when Claude reads files in those directories during the session.
CLAUDE.md files in sibling directories are never loaded for the current session.
Files load additively: all layers contribute to context simultaneously. There is no "deeper file overrides parent" semantic; more specific guidance simply sits later in the prompt. This is why a cross-layer contradiction is a real defect, not a resolution order.
Precedence chain at session start: managed policy → user (~/.claude/CLAUDE.md) → project (./CLAUDE.md or ./.claude/CLAUDE.md) → CLAUDE.local.md per layer.
@path imports expand at launch (recursive, max depth 4). They do not save context; they only organize files.
Block-level HTML comments (<!-- ... -->) are stripped before injection. Use them for human-maintainer notes that should not consume tokens.
.claude/rules/*.md with a paths: frontmatter glob loads only when Claude reads files matching that glob. Rules without paths: load unconditionally.
Every created or updated CLAUDE.md should name the relative code_map.md path agents must read before broad grep, for example Before broad grep, read ./code_map.md.
When the repository also uses Codex (AGENTS.md present), code_map.md is a shared artifact maintained by both this skill and agents-md-improver. Use the canonical code map wording from references/templates.md (it names both guidance files), never remove the other tool's mention from an existing map, and prefer the @AGENTS.md import bridge over duplicating shared instructions.
The official memory documentation recommends keeping each CLAUDE.mdunder 200 lines; longer files reduce adherence and inflate every session's startup tokens.
Preserve hook-managed marker blocks such as <!-- OMX:RUNTIME:START --> ... <!-- OMX:RUNTIME:END --> and <!-- OMX:TEAM:WORKER:START --> ... <!-- OMX:TEAM:WORKER:END -->. These are stripped at injection but are still meaningful to hook tooling and must survive edits intact.
See references/claude-md-loading.md for the full loading model, including edge cases around --add-dir, claudeMdExcludes, and auto memory boundaries.
Workflow
Phase 0: Choose Scope
Ask which context layer to work on before touching anything, using AskUserQuestion with header 优化范围:
当前仓库 (Recommended) — the repository's CLAUDE.md tree, .claude/rules/, and code_map.md. This is the default.
全局 — the user-level context: ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md, ~/.claude/rules/*.md, and files they @-import.
Skip the question when the user already named a scope ("audit my global CLAUDE.md", "check this repo's rules"), named concrete files, or the trivial-edit fast path applies. If AskUserQuestion is unavailable on the host platform, ask the same two options in plain text and wait; treat "no preference" as 当前仓库.
The answer is the authorization boundary. Choosing 全局 authorizes reading and editing files under ~/.claude/; choosing 当前仓库 leaves them untouched and only notes them as context. Managed policy files are never edited under either scope.
The commands above are a starting set; the full exclusion list below governs. Exclude generated, vendored, dependency, cache, and build-output directories from creation scans: .git/, node_modules/, target/, dist/, build/, .omx/state/, vendor/, coverage output, generated docs/site output, and language-specific package caches.
Managed policy files are noted but never edited under any scope:
Under 当前仓库, discover candidate subtrees for new nested CLAUDE.md (and possibly local code_map.md) before proposing writes. Score only real source subtrees that show one or more of: distinct stack or framework, independent manifest/command surface, divergent conventions, frequent agent work in that area, local safety boundary, or pressure to relieve a bloated root CLAUDE.md.
cross-project personal preference; in scope only when the user chose 全局
managed policy guidance
OS-managed path above
IT/DevOps controlled; never edit from this skill
Phase 2: Evidence Collection
For every in-scope file, verify claims against the repository (or, under 全局, against portability):
commands referenced in package.json, justfile, Cargo.toml, pyproject.toml, Makefile, CI workflows
actual directory structure and entry points named in the file
@import targets: every @path/to/file must resolve relative to the file containing it; recursion depth ≤ 4
code_map.md existence and whether each CLAUDE.md map pointer uses an explicit relative path
.claude/rules/*.md frontmatter: paths: globs are valid, file globs match real source files, conditional rules are not duplicating root content
alignment with .claude/settings.json — do not duplicate hard permissions.deny constraints as soft prose; if the setting already blocks an action, do not also rephrase it as a rule
claudeMdExcludes settings (in .claude/settings.json, .claude/settings.local.json, or managed) and whether they conflict with the files you are auditing
bloat signals: total line count vs the 200-line target, repeated content across nested files, code restatement that belongs in code_map.md
conflict signals: instructions that contradict each other across layers, or contradict what the user's own prompts routinely ask for
obvious-content signals: statements Claude would derive from one ls, one manifest read, or the file names themselves
preserved hook marker blocks; flag any unbalanced OMX:...:START / END pairs
CLAUDE.local.md presence — confirm it is listed in .gitignore; do not read its content
Phase 3: Quality Assessment
Use references/quality-criteria.md for detailed scoring, including the nested CLAUDE.md creation scorecard.
Quick checklist (100 points total):
Criterion
Weight
Check
judgement fit and conflict-freedom
20
no contradictions across layers, no absolute-rule walls outside expensive-mistake areas, no content Claude derives from the file tree
additive layering clarity
15
file states which layer it occupies and what it adds, without restating parent content
executable commands and gates
15
install/build/test/lint/typecheck/dev commands are real and scoped to the file's layer
progressive disclosure
15
multi-step procedures live in skills, navigation in code_map.md, path rules in .claude/rules/; the entry file points rather than holds
architecture and routing
10
points to ./code_map.md with an explicit relative path; does not duplicate directory indexes
tool permissions and safety
10
secrets, destructive ops, external services, generated/runtime paths are bounded; does not duplicate .claude/settings.json hard rules
Claude Code workflow fit
10
skills, hooks, MCP, sub-agents, auto memory boundaries are accurate and not overpromised
conciseness and currency
5
under 200 lines, current, dense, no template residue or stale paths
Grades:
A (90-100): layered, current, executable, concise
B (70-89): useful with minor gaps
C (50-69): basic but missing key operational detail
D (30-49): sparse, stale, or confusing
F (0-29): missing, misleading, or counterproductive
For each candidate nested subtree, record creation score and decision: create (≥60), candidate only (40-59), or do not create (<40). For each existing nested file, note whether it could move into a .claude/rules/*.md with a paths: glob instead.
Phase 4: Report Before Editing
Always provide this report before edits unless the user already approved an implementation plan. Use the "Quality Report" skeleton in references/report-format.md: scope, summary, layering map, code map coverage, context-engineering findings, nested guidance candidates, and a per-file assessment scored against the Phase 3 criteria.
Phase 5: Targeted Updates
When approved or already authorized by a plan, follow references/update-guidelines.md. The load-bearing rules:
Root CLAUDE.md holds what the repo is for, repo-wide pointers, and critical gotchas; target under 200 lines. Gotchas are where the tokens should go.
Delete before adding. Run a conflict pass (contradictory instructions across layers) and an obvious-content pass (anything derivable from the file tree) first — removals usually improve adherence more than additions do.
Phrase guidance as intent and let Claude judge. Reserve absolute rules for expensive mistakes: secrets, destructive operations, production deploys, PII, money movement.
Nested CLAUDE.md adds local stack, commands, and safety; never restates the parent content because parent content already loaded.
Behavior and constraints live in CLAUDE.md; navigation, anchors, and directory indexes live in code_map.md; multi-step procedures belong in a skill that CLAUDE.md points to.
Path-specific rules belong in .claude/rules/*.md with paths: frontmatter — they load only when relevant and keep the root file lean.
Reference ./code_map.md with prose ("Before broad grep, read ./code_map.md") rather than @code_map.md. @import loads at launch and defeats the on-demand purpose of a map.
Prefer pointing at rich references — a test suite, a typed interface, an HTML mockup, a rubric — over restating their content in prose.
In the root CLAUDE.md, list known nested CLAUDE.md files under a "Nested Documentation" section so Claude can discover sibling subtrees by name even when their files are not yet loaded.
Preserve hook-managed marker blocks exactly. Preserve @AGENTS.md import bridges when the repository runs both Claude Code and Codex.
Remove generic LLM advice ("write clean code", "understand before changing") and session memory dumps; auto memory already handles the latter.
If CLAUDE.local.md is present, only confirm it is in .gitignore; do not read its content.
This skill flags content that should move into a skill, but does not author skills. Name the procedure and say why it belongs elsewhere; leave the authoring to the user or a skill-creation skill.
Phase 6: Verification
Run the smallest checks that prove the edits. Under 当前仓库:
git diff --check
Manual checks to perform on every updated file, under either scope:
line count is under 200; otherwise propose splitting into .claude/rules/*.md or a skill
every @path/to/file import target exists on disk; recursion depth ≤ 4
every code_map.md pointer uses an explicit relative path
every .claude/rules/*.mdpaths: glob is valid YAML and matches at least one real file
no new content duplicates .claude/settings.json hard rules or another layer's instruction
no remaining pair of instructions contradicts each other across layers
hook marker blocks are intact with matched start/end pairs
CLAUDE.local.md is in .gitignore if it exists
If a documented full gate is expensive (browser tests, deploys), state whether it was run or why it was skipped.
Reference Files
references/context-engineering-claude5.md — Claude 5 context-engineering rules, sources, and per-shift audit checks
references/claude-md-loading.md — Claude Code loading model, edge cases, and what each loading layer can and cannot do
references/quality-criteria.md — scoring rubric, nested creation scorecard, and red flags
references/update-guidelines.md — what to add, what to remove, what to preserve, diff format
references/report-format.md — quality report and update summary skeletons
Common Issues to Flag
conflicting instructions across layers (root says one thing, a nested file or rule says the opposite) — additive loading means both arrive and Claude must spend reasoning to reconcile them
absolute-rule walls (NEVER, ALWAYS, MUST on low-stakes matters) that were written for weaker models and now over-constrain judgement
content Claude would learn from one ls or one manifest read — file tree restatement, obvious naming conventions, framework defaults
CLAUDE.md written as a second system prompt: role framing, general coding philosophy, tone instructions
session memory in CLAUDE.md — past decisions, one-off debugging history, "we tried X and it failed" — which belongs in auto memory
example walls where an interface description would do: long few-shot blocks that narrow rather than guide
multi-step procedures inline in CLAUDE.md that should be a skill the file points to
root CLAUDE.md exceeds 200 lines because path-specific content was never moved to .claude/rules/*.md
root CLAUDE.md missing an explicit ./code_map.md pointer when a root map exists or should exist
nested CLAUDE.md restates parent content under the false assumption that nested files override the root
nested CLAUDE.md only says "read the code map" without naming the relative map path
CLAUDE.md bloated with directory index content that belongs in code_map.md
@import chains exceeding 4 hops or referencing missing files
block-level <!-- ... --> comments used for instructions Claude is expected to follow (they are stripped before injection)
.claude/rules/*.md without paths: frontmatter that would have been a perfect path-scoped fit
CLAUDE.local.md checked into git (must be gitignored)
Codex-only guidance from AGENTS.md pasted into CLAUDE.md instead of using the @AGENTS.md import bridge
hook-managed marker blocks accidentally rewritten or with mismatched start/end pairs
external production services or credentials not called out as a safety boundary
skills, sub-agents, hooks, or MCP servers described as available when they are only aspirational
global ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md carrying one repository's paths, commands, or conventions as if they applied everywhere
Final Output After Edits
After approved edits, emit the "Update Summary" skeleton in references/report-format.md: scope, files changed, what improved, verification results (passed/failed/skipped with reason), and remaining risks.
