Use to produce a risk-based refactor + test plan for recently-changed code on a diff/branch/PR by computing CRAP (complexity × untested) on changed methods. Multi-language — TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Java, Kotlin, Go, Ruby, C#, Rust, PHP — auto-discovers how the repo generates coverage. Triggers — "/crap-analyzer", "analyze CRAP", "compute CRAP", "find risky methods", "find complex untested methods".
Scanned 5/27/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add swingerman/disciplined-agentic-engineering --skill crap-analyzer --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Crap Analyzer?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/swingerman-crap-analyzer)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: crap-analyzer
description: Use to produce a risk-based refactor + test plan for recently-changed code on a diff/branch/PR by computing CRAP (complexity × untested) on changed methods. Multi-language — TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Java, Kotlin, Go, Ruby, C#, Rust, PHP — auto-discovers how the repo generates coverage. Triggers — "/crap-analyzer", "analyze CRAP", "compute CRAP", "find risky methods", "find complex untested methods".
---
# CRAP Analyzer
CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) flags functions that are both **complex** and **poorly tested** — the worst-risk code to ship.
```
CRAP(m) = comp(m)² × (1 − cov(m))³ + comp(m)
```
This skill scopes analysis to a diff, ranks findings worst-first, and turns each finding into a concrete refactor + test-stub proposal.
## Workflow
1. **Determine the diff.** First that works:
- `gh pr diff` / `gh pr diff <number>` if a GitHub PR is referenced.
- `git diff --merge-base <main-branch>` — detect the main branch with `git remote show origin | grep 'HEAD branch'`.
- `git diff --cached` for staged changes.
- `git diff HEAD~N..HEAD` for a named commit range.
- Explicit file list if the user names files.
Pipe the diff to `scripts/compute_crap.py --diff -`.
2. **Locate or generate coverage.** Let the script auto-discover coverage files first (lcov, Cobertura, JaCoCo, Clover, Go `coverage.out`, coverage.py JSON). If nothing is found, follow [references/coverage-discovery.md](references/coverage-discovery.md) to detect the toolchain, then ask before running it. On decline, proceed with coverage=0% and flag it in the report header.
3. **Run the analyzer.**
```bash
python3 <skill-dir>/scripts/compute_crap.py --diff - --repo-root <repo> --threshold <N> --format both
```
Default threshold is 20. Read `.crap-analyzer.json` at repo root if present and pass its `threshold` through. Full flag list and output JSON shape: [references/script-reference.md](references/script-reference.md).
4. **Present the report.** Show the markdown table. For each finding, link `file:start_line`. If more than ~8 findings, surface the top 5 and mention the rest.
5. **Propose fixes per finding, worst-first.** For each function above threshold:
- **Read the function.** Score alone is not enough — look at the code.
- **Refactor proposal.** Extract-method diff or guard-clause rewrite. Patterns: [references/refactor-patterns.md](references/refactor-patterns.md).
- **Test stubs.** Cover each uncovered branch in the repo's test framework. Templates: [references/test-stub-templates.md](references/test-stub-templates.md).
- **Respect codebase conventions.** Read nearby code and match naming, error handling, DI, async patterns.
When `len(findings) >= 3`, dispatch one subagent per finding in a **single message** — per-finding work is independent so parallelizing drops wall-clock from O(n) to O(1). Prompt template + aggregation rules: [references/subagent-prompt.md](references/subagent-prompt.md). After subagents return, sort by CRAP descending and sanity-check every "safe to auto-apply" claim against step 7.
6. **Present the wrap-up menu.** Dispatch refactor / test-stub work via `AskUserQuestion`. Menu structure and apply loop: [references/wrap-up-menu.md](references/wrap-up-menu.md). "Safe refactor" = pure extract-method with no behavior change (same inputs → same outputs, same side effects, same order). One Edit per action; confirm each before applying.
7. **Never auto-apply:**
- Changes that reorder side effects or async operations (`await`, `.then`, `subscribe`, promise chains, RxJS / coroutine / goroutine ordering).
- Changes to constructors, initializers, or lifecycle hooks.
- Changes to reactive / stream operator ordering.
- Template / markup / view changes — the script doesn't analyze those.
## Report format
```markdown
### 1. `file.py:42` — `do_thing` (CRAP 240)
**Why it's flagged:** complexity 15, coverage 0% (no tests touching body).
**Refactor proposal:**
<unified diff or code block>
**Test stubs to add:**
<framework-appropriate test block>
```
Keep each section tight — one paragraph of "why", diff, stubs. No preamble.
## Config file
Optional `.crap-analyzer.json` at repo root:
```json
{ "threshold": 20 }
```
Read if present, pass `--threshold` to the script. No other keys for now.
## When not to use this skill
- Analyzing a full codebase unprompted — scope is diff-only by design.
- Running as a blocking gate in CI — this is a Claude-driven review, not a deterministic check.
- Files the script doesn't recognize. Supported extensions listed in [references/script-reference.md](references/script-reference.md); binaries, generated code, and config files are skipped automatically.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!