Loading...
Loading...
Found 35 Skills
Forces the laziest solution that actually works, simplest, shortest, most minimal. Channels a senior dev who has seen everything: question whether the task needs to exist at all (YAGNI), reach for the standard library before custom code, native platform features before dependencies, one line before fifty. Supports intensity levels: lite, full (default), ultra. Use whenever the user says "ponytail", "be lazy", "lazy mode", "simplest solution", "minimal solution", "yagni", "do less", or "shortest path", and whenever they complain about over-engineering, bloat, boilerplate, or unnecessary dependencies.
Code review focused exclusively on over-engineering. Finds what to delete: reinvented standard library, unneeded dependencies, speculative abstractions, dead flexibility. One line per finding: location, what to cut, what replaces it. Use when the user says "review for over-engineering", "what can we delete", "is this over-engineered", "simplify review", or invokes /ponytail-review. Complements correctness-focused review, this one only hunts complexity.
Whole-repo audit for over-engineering. Like ponytail-review, but scans the entire codebase instead of a diff: a ranked list of what to delete, simplify, or replace with stdlib/native equivalents. Use when the user says "audit this codebase", "audit for over-engineering", "what can I delete from this repo", "find bloat", "ponytail-audit", or "/ponytail-audit". One-shot report, does not apply fixes.
deslop a diff, remove AI slop and over-engineering while preserving exact behavior. Triggers: /deslop, remove AI slop, clean AI artifacts, strip over-engineered patterns, simplify code, review changes for bloat. Flags: --staged, --unstaged, --base <branch>.
Critical review of Intent design quality. Checks for over-engineering, YAGNI violations, premature abstraction, and simplification opportunities. Uses interactive discussion to refine design decisions.
Ruthless complexity killer. Challenges every abstraction, layer, and pattern with "can you do this with 1/10th the complexity?" Roasts over-engineering and forces the simplest solution that works.
When writing or reviewing code to prevent over-engineering and speculative features. Use when the user says "is this over-engineered," "do we need this," "should I add," "future-proof," or "just in case." For simplicity concerns, see kiss. For abstraction design, see solid.
Evaluates and prevents unnecessary abstractions by analyzing interfaces, layers, and patterns against concrete requirements. Use when evaluating new abstractions, reviewing architecture proposals, detecting over-engineering, or simplifying existing code. Triggers on "is this abstraction necessary", "too many layers", "simplify architecture", "reduce complexity", "over-engineered", "do we need this interface", or when reviewing design patterns.
Use when Code implementation and refactoring, architecturing or designing systems, process and workflow improvements, error handling and validation. Provide tehniquest to avoid over-engineering and apply iterative improvements.
Audit code for over-engineering, premature optimization, and cognitive complexity. Identifies unnecessary abstractions, YAGNI violations, and overly complex solutions. Read-only analysis. Triggers: review simplicity, over-engineering, complexity check, YAGNI.
Before adding abstraction, asks "do we need this now?" Activates when proposing factories, abstract classes, config-driven behavior, or "for future extensibility." Resists over-engineering. Three similar lines are better than a premature abstraction.
Audit code architecture for over-engineering and unnecessary abstractions. Use when user asks to "review architecture", "simplify code structure", "reduce over-engineering", "evaluate abstractions", or mentions premature abstraction, interface proliferation, factory patterns, YAGNI, or enterprise-grade complexity.