Research & Analysis🌐universal

finding-duplicate-functions

skills/finding-duplicate-functions/SKILL.md

Use when auditing a codebase for semantic duplication - functions that do the same thing but have different names or implementations. Especially useful for LLM-generated codebases where new functions are often created rather than reusing existing ones.

Quick Start

Install this SKILL.md

npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers-lab/tree/main/skills/finding-duplicate-functions
---
name: finding-duplicate-functions
description: Use when auditing a codebase for semantic duplication - functions that do the same thing but have different names or implementations. Especially useful for LLM-generated codebases where new functions are often created rather than reusing existing ones.
---

# Finding Duplicate-Intent Functions

## Overview

LLM-generated codebases accumulate semantic duplicates: functions that serve the same purpose but were implemented independently. Classical copy-paste detectors (jscpd) find syntactic duplicates but miss "same intent, different implementation."

This skill uses a two-phase approach: classical extraction followed by LLM-powered intent clustering.

## When to Use

- Codebase has grown organically with multiple contributors (human or LLM)
- You suspect utility functions have been reimplemented multiple times
- Before major refactoring to identify consolidation opportunities
- After jscpd has been run and syntactic duplicates are already handled

## Quick Reference

| Phase | Tool | Model | Output |
|-------|------|-------|--------|
| 1. Extract | `scripts/extract-functions.sh` | - | `catalog.json` |
| 2. Categorize | `scripts/categorize-prompt.md` | haiku | `categorized.json` |
| 3. Split | `scripts/prepare-category-analysis.sh` | - | `categories/*.json` |
| 4. Detect | `scripts/find-duplicates-prompt.md` | opus | `duplicates/*.json` |
| 5. Report | `scripts/generate-report.sh` | - | `report.md` |

## Process

```dot
digraph duplicate_detection {
  rankdir=TB;
  node [shape=box];

  extract [label="1. Extract function catalog\n./scripts/extract-functions.sh"];
  categorize [label="2. Categorize by domain\n(haiku subagent)"];
  split [label="3. Split into categories\n./scripts/prepare-category-analysis.sh"];
  detect [label="4. Find duplicates per category\n(opus subagent per category)"];
  report [label="5. Generate report\n./scripts/generate-report.sh"];
  review [label="6. Human review & consolidate"];

  extract -> categorize -> split -> detect -> report -> review;
}
```

### Phase 1: Extract Function Catalog

```bash
./scripts/extract-functions.sh src/ -o catalog.json
```

Options:
- `-o FILE`: Output file (default: stdout)
- `-c N`: Lines of context to capture (default: 15)
- `-t GLOB`: File types (default: `*.ts,*.tsx,*.js,*.jsx`)
- `--include-tests`: Include test files (excluded by default)

Test files (`*.test.*`, `*.spec.*`, `__tests__/**`) are excluded by default since test utilities are less likely to be consolidation candidates.

### Phase 2: Categorize by Domain

Dispatch a **haiku** subagent using the prompt in `scripts/categorize-prompt.md`.

Insert the contents of `catalog.json` where indicated in the prompt template. Save output as `categorized.json`.

### Phase 3: Split into Categories

```bash
./scripts/prepare-category-analysis.sh categorized.json ./categories
```

Creates one JSON file per category. Only categories with 3+ functions are worth analyzing.

### Phase 4: Find Duplicates (Per Category)

For each category file in `./categories/`, dispatch an **opus** subagent using the prompt in `scripts/find-duplicates-prompt.md`.

Save each output as `./duplicates/{category}.json`.

### Phase 5: Generate Report

```bash
./scripts/generate-report.sh ./duplicates ./duplicates-report.md
```

Produces a prioritized markdown report grouped by confidence level.

### Phase 6: Human Review

Review the report. For HIGH confidence duplicates:
1. Verify the recommended survivor has tests
2. Update callers to use the survivor
3. Delete the duplicates
4. Run tests

## High-Risk Duplicate Zones

Focus extraction on these areas first - they accumulate duplicates fastest:

| Zone | Common Duplicates |
|------|-------------------|
| `utils/`, `helpers/`, `lib/` | General utilities reimplemented |
| Validation code | Same checks written multiple ways |
| Error formatting | Error-to-string conversions |
| Path manipulation | Joining, resolving, normalizing paths |
| String formatting | Case conversion, truncation, escaping |
| Date formatting | Same formats implemented repeatedly |
| API response shaping | Similar transformations for different endpoints |

## Common Mistakes

**Extracting too much**: Focus on exported functions and public methods. Internal helpers are less likely to be duplicated across files.

**Skipping the categorization step**: Going straight to duplicate detection on the full catalog produces noise. Categories focus the comparison.

**Using haiku for duplicate detection**: Haiku is cost-effective for categorization but misses subtle semantic duplicates. Use Opus for the actual duplicate analysis.

**Consolidating without tests**: Before deleting duplicates, ensure the survivor has tests covering all use cases of the deleted functions.
Repository
432stars
37forks
View on GitHub
Details
DiscoveredOct 14, 2026
Last UpdatedOct 13, 2026
Author@obra
Quality Score
65/100

Related Skills

More research & analysis skills you might like

pr-improver
Research & Analysis
Runs an autonomous review-and-fix improvement loop over the current branch's changes until a PR review comes back clean, scoped mechanically to the directories the branch touched. Reviews are performed by an installed PR-review skill (default: pr-review-toolkit's review-pr). Use to fix review findings on a branch before opening or updating a pull request ('clean up this branch', 'fix this PR until review passes', 'run review-and-fix on my changes'). NOT for a one-time review — run the PR-review skill directly.
🤖claude🌐universal
7.5k
643
View
code-improver
Research & Analysis
Runs an autonomous review-and-fix improvement loop over any code target — a skill, plugin, module, or directory — using a reviewer the user names: any installed skill or agent. Keeps a cross-round findings ledger, escalates when fixes stop converging, and guards scope mechanically. Use when asked to 'improve this code until review passes', 'run an improvement loop with <reviewer>', or to iterate review-and-fix with a specific reviewer. For skills prefer the skill-improver entry; for a branch prefer pr-improver.
🤖claude🌐universal
7.5k
643
View
skill-improver
Research & Analysis
Runs an autonomous review-and-fix improvement loop over a Claude Code skill until a review comes back clean, with a cross-round findings ledger, escalation when fixes stop converging, and a mechanical scope guard. Reviews are performed by the plugin-dev skill-reviewer agent. Use to fix skill quality issues, iteratively refine a skill, or resume a loop after an escalation ('fix my skill', 'improve this skill until it passes review', 'skill improvement loop'). NOT for a one-time review — use the plugin-dev skill-reviewer agent directly.
🤖claude🌐universal
7.5k
643
View
audit-augmentation
Research & Analysis
Augments Trailmark code graphs with external audit findings from SARIF static analysis results, weAudit annotation files, and version-gated Trailmark 0.4.x binary-analysis graph exports. Maps findings to graph nodes by file and line overlap, creates severity-based subgraphs, and enables cross-referencing findings with pre-analysis data (blast radius, taint, etc.). Use when projecting SARIF results onto a code graph, overlaying weAudit annotations, importing binary graph findings, cross-referencing Semgrep, CodeQL, or binary-analysis findings with call graph data, or visualizing audit findings in the context of code structure.
🌐universal
7.5k
643
View