refactor-agents-md

# Overview Refactor an instruction file (`CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`). Every retained instruction competes for attention in the sessions that load it. The file serves every agent and model that reads it, not only this session's. The filename does not say who reads it, since Claude Code reads `AGENTS.md` too. Each reader assembles its own system prompt, so a line that restates one reader's prompt can be the only copy for another. Audit each line against every reader. ## Instructions Use `AskUserQuestion` in Claude Code or `request_user_input` in Codex when available. 1. **Pick the target and its readers.** If the invocation names a file, use it. Otherwise discover candidate files using the reader platforms' loading rules in the references below, and ask only if the target remains ambiguous. Resolve the readers from the invocation and context; ask only when uncertain. Read one reference per reader platform, both when both read the file: - **Claude models:** [references/claude-code.md](references/claude-code.md) for which files load and when, its guides, its system-prompt probe, and its demote destinations. - **GPT models:** [references/codex.md](references/codex.md) for which files load and when, its guides, and its demote destinations. For a targeted change, the verdicts below cover only the lines it adds or touches: the rest of the file stays as it is, and anything noticed there is a follow-up. 2. **Fetch the guides.** Follow each loaded reference's guide-fetching instructions, for a one-line change too: a verdict without the guides rests on memory. Reuse current guidance already fetched in this conversation. Done when each page a reference lists has been fetched for each reader in this session. 3. **Audit.** Read the file and give every instruction in scope exactly one verdict, judged against the target's bar below. Done when no instruction in scope lacks one. - **contradiction**: conflicts with another instruction or a reader's requirements such that both cannot be satisfied. Record both sides. - **delete**: fails the no-op test on every reader, meaning each would behave the same without it, or a guide says to remove it because it was written for an earlier model's habits and no other reader needs it either. Judge defaults against the fetched pages and the reference's probe, not memory. Covers instructions the readers already follow by default, instructions too vague to act on, and platitudes like "write clean code". A line needed by one reader and harmless to the others is a keep. - **demote**: real instruction that only applies to some paths or tasks. Pick its destination from the references; it must load for every reader of the source file, and with no such destination the line is a keep. If it describes a multi-step workflow, propose a skill instead. Name the destination in the sign-off. - **rewrite**: right meaning, phrasing falls short of the fetched best practices. Also a rewrite when the line carries words that fail the no-op test on their own: a duplicate of another line, a definition of a term the model knows, or emphasis; a rationale or example stays, since both steer the model. Among wordings that pass the bar, the shortest wins. Where a reader's guide gives measured wording for the same instruction and every other reader's guide allows it, use that wording. Voice follows the system prompt: a line addresses the model as "you" and names the human as "the user", so "I" or "my" for the human, and "Claude" or "the agent" for the model, are rewrites; words quoted as user speech keep their own voice. - **keep**: earns its always-loaded cost as written, and no shorter wording has the same effect. A delete that rests on the shipped system prompt already saying the same thing needs the probe evidence from `references/claude-code.md` for each Claude reader. The bar per target: - **User-level** (loaded into every session in every project): a keep must apply across all projects. - **Project-level** (loaded into every session in this project, or in its directory's subtree for a nested file): a keep must be underivable from the code: a one-sentence project description, commands the readers would guess wrong, domain concepts, gotchas. Lines restating what the code already shows, and volatile detail like file trees, are deletes because they go stale and stale lines poison the context. 4. **Get decisions.** Reuse changes and verdicts the user already authorized. Resolve contradictions from instruction priority and explicit user intent where possible; for each unresolved one, ask with `AskUserQuestion` or `request_user_input`, single-select, each conflicting version an option. Present any remaining delete and demote proposals, with the per-reader probe result beside each prompt-dependent delete, and collect sign-off with one more question. Preserve explicit review boundaries and leave unapproved proposals untouched. 5. **Rewrite.** Apply the signed-off verdicts in one pass, without asking again; they are the request. Apply only those: anything else noticed while editing is a follow-up to report in the final message. Search references before removing or moving guidance, and update affected pointers. Done when every audited instruction landed where its verdict says: kept, rewritten, demoted, or deleted.