Code Simplifier

Analyze recently modified code and suggest refinements that improve clarity, consistency, and maintainability - without changing what the code does. The review covers three complementary aspects:

1. Code Reuse - Eliminate duplication, consolidate shared logic, leverage existing utilities.
2. Code Quality - Improve naming, reduce complexity, enforce project standards from AGENTS.md.
3. Efficiency - Fix algorithmic issues, remove unnecessary work, optimize resource usage.

Review Process

Identify the Scope

By default, focus on recently modified code. Use git diff or the file list from the current PR/MR to determine the changed files. When the user specifies a different scope, follow their instruction:

• Specific files: "simplify src/auth.py" - review only the named files
• Directory: "simplify the utils/ folder" - review all files in that directory
• Full repo: "simplify the whole project" - review the entire codebase
• PR/MR: "simplify this PR" - review only files changed in the current PR/MR

Sub-Agent Delegation (Preferred)

When sub-agent capability is available, delegate each review aspect to a separate sub-agent for parallel, focused analysis:

1. Code Reuse Review Agent - Read references/code-reuse-review.md and analyze the changed files for duplication and consolidation opportunities.
2. Code Quality Review Agent - Read references/code-quality-review.md and analyze the changed files for clarity, naming, complexity, and standards compliance.
3. Efficiency Review Agent - Read references/efficiency-review.md and analyze the changed files for performance and resource usage issues.

Each sub-agent should:

• Read the corresponding reference document for detailed criteria and output format
• Read AGENTS.md at the repository root for project-specific coding conventions
• Analyze only the recently changed code (unless instructed otherwise)
• Return findings in the format specified by its reference document

After all sub-agents complete, synthesize their findings into a single consolidated report.

Sequential Review (Fallback)

When sub-agents are not available, perform all three reviews sequentially:

1. Read references/code-reuse-review.md - review for duplication and reuse
2. Read references/code-quality-review.md - review for clarity and standards
3. Read references/efficiency-review.md - review for performance and resources

Apply the criteria and output format from each reference document.

Guiding Philosophy

• Preserve Functionality: Never change what the code does - only how it does it. All original features, outputs, and behaviors remain intact.
• Follow Project Standards: Apply the coding conventions from AGENTS.md at the repository root (import ordering, naming, module structure, error handling, component patterns).
• Clarity Over Brevity: Prefer explicit, readable code over compact one-liners. Avoid nested ternaries - use if/else or switch for multiple conditions.
• Maintain Balance: Avoid over-simplification that reduces clarity, creates overly clever solutions, or combines too many concerns into a single function.
• Pragmatism: Solve real problems, not imaginary ones. Do not optimize for theoretical edge cases or micro-benchmarks that do not matter at the project's scale.

Consolidated Output Format

Present the combined results from all three review aspects:

## Code Simplification Review

### Scope
[List of files reviewed and how scope was determined]

### Code Reuse
[Findings from the reuse review, using **[REUSE]** tags]

### Code Quality
[Findings from the quality review, using **[QUALITY]** tags]

### Efficiency
[Findings from the efficiency review, using **[EFFICIENCY]** tags]

### Summary
[Overall assessment: is the code in good shape, or does it need significant refinement?]
[Prioritized list of the most impactful changes to make first]

When a review aspect has no findings, include it with an explicit "no issues found" statement rather than omitting the section.

Reference Files

• references/code-reuse-review.md - Detailed criteria for detecting duplication, consolidation opportunities, and over-abstraction
• references/code-quality-review.md - Detailed criteria for naming, complexity, error handling, and project standards compliance
• references/efficiency-review.md - Detailed criteria for algorithmic complexity, unnecessary work, resource usage, and I/O patterns