SkillAgentSearch skills...

csharp-refactoring

Performs safe, behavior-preserving refactoring of C#/.NET code, verified with build, tests, and analyzers. USE FOR: rename or move a symbol/type/file; extract a method/type/interface; inline a wrapper/method/local; merge or consolidate near-identical classes or duplicate helpers; split or modernize…

Install / Use

npx skills add dotnet/skills --skill csharp-refactoring

Installs into whichever agent you are using.

About this skill
📄

SKILL.md

Installable skill definition

Quality Score

87/100

Category

Legal

Supported Platforms

Zed

Tags

Our assessment of csharp-refactoring

csharp-refactoring scores 87/100 on our quality scale, 53rd of 92 Legal skills we index.

Its SKILL.md is 11 KB long, well organised into 12 sections with 1 code example: a thorough specification that gives an agent plenty to work with.

With 5,471 GitHub stars, it is one of the more widely adopted skills in the catalogue.

Substance
29/30
Structure
17/20
Description
15/15
Adoption
16/20
Freshness
15/15

Maintenance, license and trust

  • The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so csharp-refactoring is actively maintained.
  • It is released under the MIT license, a permissive license that allows use, modification and commercial use with attribution.
  • Its trust signals score 100/100, with no cautions. These come from repository metadata, not a code audit — read the skill file before letting an agent act on it.

csharp-refactoring compared with similar skills

All 4 of these similar skills score higher than csharp-refactoring; compare them before choosing.

SkillScoreStarsUpdatedFormat
csharp-refactoring (this skill)by dotnet875.5k2d agoSKILL.md
algorithmic-artby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
pptxby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
designby nextlevelbuilder100130.2k5d agoSKILL.md
ui-ux-pro-maxby nextlevelbuilder100130.2k5d agoSKILL.md

Frequently asked questions

How do I install csharp-refactoring?
Run npx skills add dotnet/skills --skill csharp-refactoring. The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent.
Which AI agents does csharp-refactoring work with?
It is written for Zed, as a SKILL.md file. Other agents that read the same format can often use it too.
Is csharp-refactoring safe to use?
It is MIT-licensed and scores 100/100 on trust signals. Skills are instructions an agent will follow, so read the file before installing it and do not approve commands you do not understand.
Is csharp-refactoring still maintained?
The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so csharp-refactoring is actively maintained.

name: csharp-refactoring description: "Performs safe, behavior-preserving refactoring of C#/.NET code, verified with build, tests, and analyzers. USE FOR: rename or move a symbol/type/file; extract a method/type/interface; inline a wrapper/method/local; merge or consolidate near-identical classes or duplicate helpers; split or modernize C# code; generated/partial declarations; public, serialized, friend-assembly, or multi-targeted contracts; and mixed requests where a feature, bug fix, package/framework upgrade, public nullability change, or other behavior/contract change is presented as a refactor and must be separated or declined. DO NOT USE FOR: ordinary feature or bug-fix requests not framed as refactoring; upgrades after reclassification (use dotnet-upgrade); new tests; or formatting-only passes (use dotnet format)." license: MIT

C# Refactoring (behavior-preserving)

A refactor changes structure, never observable behavior. Do the edit with binding-aware tools, then confirm behavior held with a build + the relevant tests. Keep the effort proportional to the change: a one-line local rename does not need the ceremony a public multi-targeted change does.

Mandatory gate: classify before validation or editing

Read only enough repository context to classify the request. Do this before restoring, building, or making an edit. If the entire requested operation changes behavior or cannot preserve the relevant public/source contract, the correct result of this skill is a decisive handoff, not an implementation attempt:

  1. State: Not a behavior-preserving refactor: <specific reason>.
  2. State: No files changed.
  3. State: Next workflow: <workflow>. Then stop. Do not add manual implementation steps, alternatives, an offer to proceed without the workflow, or a follow-up question — even when that workflow is unavailable.

| Requested as a "refactor" | Classification and action | |---|---| | Framework or NuGet version change | Upgrade. Do not edit or validate the upgrade here; hand off to dotnet-upgrade. | | New capability, flag, endpoint, tier, or behavior | Feature. Do not implement it here; hand off to the repository's feature workflow. | | Threshold, rate, output, or bug-result change | Behavior change. Defer it and hand off to the repository's bug-fix or behavior-change workflow; still complete any clearly separable structural operation. | | Tighten or loosen a shipped/public nullable annotation | Source-contract change. Leave the declaration and API record unchanged; hand off to the repository's API-contract workflow. |

The three-line stop response applies only when the entire request is outside behavior-preserving refactoring. For a mixed request, perform only a clearly separable structural operation and explicitly defer the behavior/contract change. Never state No files changed. after completing that structural operation, and never modify tests to make an unauthorized behavior change appear preserved.

Work only in the current repository

Resolve the repository root first (git rev-parse --show-toplevel) and resolve any prompt-provided relative solution/project path inside that root. Search and edit only that workspace. Never use filesystem-wide search or select a similarly named clone, temporary directory, build output, or another worktree because a file also exists there. If the named path is absent from the current repository, stop and report that mismatch instead of guessing another workspace.

Rename / move by bindings, not text

The #1 way a "rename" silently corrupts code is editing textual matches (comments, strings, unrelated overloads) instead of real bindings. Find every binding reference first, then edit semantically. Use the strongest tool available: an IDE/Roslyn workspace refactoring, then the C# LSP the dotnet plugin declares (findReferences, goToDefinition, incomingCalls, rename code action), then analyzer code-fixes / Roslynator, then compiler-validated edits (edit the true bindings, rebuild, let the compiler flag misses). Plain find/replace only when scope is provably tiny and every hit is verified. Include every partial declaration, and edit the generator input, never generated (*.g.cs) output.

For the operation → Roslyn-provider mapping and representative PRs, see references/operation-catalog.md.

Consolidate toward the existing source of truth

When de-duplicating, preserve the ownership direction stated by the code or request. If B duplicates an implementation already owned by A, keep A canonical and make B delegate to it; do not invert the dependency merely because either direction compiles. Preserve public compatibility wrappers when the duplicate surface is shipped, and migrate only in-repo callers that are safe to move.

Decisions that change the edit

Use the first matching row instead of applying the requested operation mechanically:

| Situation | Do | Never | |---|---|---| | Inline an internal, unshipped pass-through wrapper | Migrate every binding reference to the target, remove the wrapper, then compile to catch misses. | Keep dead indirection "for compatibility" when no compatibility boundary exists. | | Inline or remove a shipped/public wrapper | Migrate ordinary in-repo callers, but retain an [Obsolete] forwarding entry point unless the request explicitly authorizes a breaking change. | Delete a shipped API merely because all current source callers were migrated. | | Rename a member reached by a string, reflection, DI, or configuration | Rename binding-based callers; preserve the observed external name with a forwarding shim or metadata, and exercise the old-name path. | Rewrite an external/configured name just to make the new source name consistent. | | Extract duplicated logic whose callers pass different values | Extract the algorithm and pass each caller's existing inputs through unchanged. | Collapse distinct inputs, evaluation order, rounding, or side effects into one caller's version. | | Rename code compiled under #if or multiple TFMs | Update every source branch and validate each target framework explicitly. | Treat a green default-target build as evidence for unbuilt branches. | | Merge near-identical types | Parameterize only the values that differ, migrate every construction site, and preserve each old value exactly. If the old types are internal/unshipped and the request says to merge into one type, delete their declarations. | Retain unnecessary aliases, static holders, factories, or wrapper types that leave the requested merge incomplete; introduce a new hierarchy or behavior. |

Preserve contracts beyond C# call sites

Compilation proves binding compatibility, not every external contract. Before renaming or moving a type/member, check whether its name or metadata is observed by serialization, reflection, dependency injection, configuration binding, source generators, P/Invoke, or dynamic.

| Boundary | Required decision | |---|---| | Serialized/configuration name | Preserve the external name with the repository's existing mechanism (for example, JsonPropertyName) while migrating C# callers; run a focused round-trip or payload test. | | Public nullable annotation | The mandatory classification gate applies: leave it unchanged and hand off as a source-contract change. | | Uncovered reflection or runtime lookup | Do not guess that a compile-clean rename is safe. Preserve the observed name or stop and report the unverified runtime boundary. |

Verify proportionally

Confirm behavior is preserved after the edit — scaled to blast radius, not a fixed ceremony:

  • Local / private (method-local or private member, one file, single target framework, no public surface, no partial/generated/#if): skip a separate baseline unless the tree is already suspect. Make the edit, then run the narrowest build and relevant tests once. Let the compiler catch missed references.
  • Cross-boundary (public/shipped symbol, multi-targeted project, #if/platform branches, or partial/generated code): establish a baseline, then run an explicit build and the relevant tests for each target framework after the edit (a test command's implicit build is not separate build evidence; a green default build can hide a break on another TFM), and run the hazards check below.

Use the repo's own build/test workflow when it documents one (README/CONTRIBUTING, build.*, eng/, global.json, .github/workflows); its instructions win over any generic command.

Typical workflow (one operation)

  1. Choose one named refactoring operation and keep the step focused on that operation only.
  2. Find true binding references (findReferences/goToDefinition/rename) and include all partial declarations.
  3. Establish a baseline first only for a cross-boundary change or a tree not already known green.
  4. Apply the change via the most semantics-aware tool available; avoid blind find/replace when possible.
  5. Rebuild and run the relevant tests. If the gate goes red, report the failure and repair or reassess only your edit; never discard unrelated worktree changes.

Otherwise:

dotnet build   # 0 errors
dotnet test    # stays green; same pass count as before

One operation per step; never mix a refactor and a behavior change in the same step. On red, stop and report the failure; repair only your edit without discarding unrelated worktree changes.

Final response contract

Keep the handoff concise and evidence-based:

  • Refactor: name the structural operation and the symbols/files changed.
  • Preserved: name the behavior or compatibility boundary and the mechanism that preserved it.
  • Validation: report the exact commands and observed result; never claim success after a failed restore, build, target framework, or test run.
  • Deferred: for a mixed request, name the behavior/contract change intentionally left undone and its correct next workflow. Omit this line when nothing was deferred.

Cross-boundary hazards (only when it touches a boundary)

If — and only if — the change touches a public symbol, a multi-targeted project, or partial/generated code, some breaks won't show up as a failing test. Search the repo for the surface that governs the symbol (don't assume): the public-API gate (PublicAPI.Shipped/Unshipped.txt for PublicApiAnalyzers, and/or ApiCompat/<EnablePackageValidation> — not interchangeable), <TargetFrameworks>/#if branches, and InternalsVisibleTo. Moving a public type to another assembly needs [TypeForwardedTo] in the original assembly; a move within one assembly does not. A public rename needs an [Obsolete] shim, not a forwarder. For a provably local/private change, skip these checks.

Stop and ask when

  • The baseline is already red (you can't prove you preserved behavior).
  • A public/shipped API would change without a forwarder/shim or explicit authorization for a breaking change.
  • Equivalence depends on runtime behavior tests don't cover (reflection, DI, serialization, dynamic, P/Invoke) — flag it.

Related Skills

View on GitHub
GitHub Stars5.5k
CategoryLegal
Updated2d ago
Forks418

Languages

C#

Trust signals

100/100

From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.

No cautions