export declare const REFACTOR_TEMPLATE = "# Intelligent Refactor Command\n\n## Usage\n```\n/refactor [--scope=] [--strategy=]\n\nArguments:\n refactoring-target: What to refactor. Can be:\n - File path: src/auth/handler.ts\n - Symbol name: \"AuthService class\"\n - Pattern: \"all functions using deprecated API\"\n - Description: \"extract validation logic into separate module\"\n\nOptions:\n --scope: Refactoring scope (default: module)\n - file: Single file only\n - module: Module/directory scope\n - project: Entire codebase\n\n --strategy: Risk tolerance (default: safe)\n - safe: Conservative, maximum test coverage required\n - aggressive: Allow broader changes with adequate coverage\n```\n\n## What This Command Does\n\nPerforms intelligent, deterministic refactoring with full codebase awareness. Unlike blind search-and-replace, this command:\n\n1. **Understands your intent** - Analyzes what you actually want to achieve\n2. **Maps the codebase** - Builds a definitive codemap before touching anything\n3. **Assesses risk** - Evaluates test coverage and determines verification strategy\n4. **Plans meticulously** - Creates a detailed plan with Plan agent\n5. **Executes precisely** - Step-by-step refactoring with LSP and AST-grep\n6. **Verifies constantly** - Runs tests after each change to ensure zero regression\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 0: INTENT GATE (MANDATORY FIRST STEP)\n\n**BEFORE ANY ACTION, classify and validate the request.**\n\n## Step 0.1: Parse Request Type\n\n| Signal | Classification | Action |\n|--------|----------------|--------|\n| Specific file/symbol | Explicit | Proceed to codebase analysis |\n| \"Refactor X to Y\" | Clear transformation | Proceed to codebase analysis |\n| \"Improve\", \"Clean up\" | Open-ended | **MUST ask**: \"What specific improvement?\" |\n| Ambiguous scope | Uncertain | **MUST ask**: \"Which modules/files?\" |\n| Missing context | Incomplete | **MUST ask**: \"What's the desired outcome?\" |\n\n## Step 0.2: Validate Understanding\n\nBefore proceeding, confirm:\n- [ ] Target is clearly identified\n- [ ] Desired outcome is understood\n- [ ] Scope is defined (file/module/project)\n- [ ] Success criteria can be articulated\n\n**If ANY of above is unclear, ASK CLARIFYING QUESTION:**\n\n```\nI want to make sure I understand the refactoring goal correctly.\n\n**What I understood**: [interpretation]\n**What I'm unsure about**: [specific ambiguity]\n\nOptions I see:\n1. [Option A] - [implications]\n2. [Option B] - [implications]\n\n**My recommendation**: [suggestion with reasoning]\n\nShould I proceed with [recommendation], or would you prefer differently?\n```\n\n## Step 0.3: Create Initial Todos\n\n**IMMEDIATELY after understanding the request, create todos:**\n\n```\nTodoWrite([\n {\"id\": \"phase-1\", \"content\": \"PHASE 1: Codebase Analysis - launch parallel explore agents\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"phase-2\", \"content\": \"PHASE 2: Build Codemap - map dependencies and impact zones\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"phase-3\", \"content\": \"PHASE 3: Test Assessment - analyze test coverage and verification strategy\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"phase-4\", \"content\": \"PHASE 4: Plan Generation - invoke Plan agent for detailed refactoring plan\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"phase-5\", \"content\": \"PHASE 5: Execute Refactoring - step-by-step with continuous verification\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"phase-6\", \"content\": \"PHASE 6: Final Verification - full test suite and regression check\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"}\n])\n```\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 1: CODEBASE ANALYSIS (PARALLEL EXPLORATION)\n\n**Mark phase-1 as in_progress.**\n\n## 1.1: Launch Parallel Explore Agents (BACKGROUND)\n\nFire ALL of these simultaneously using `call_oco_agent`:\n\n```\n// Agent 1: Find the refactoring target\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\",\n run_in_background=true,\n prompt=\"Find all occurrences and definitions of [TARGET]. \n Report: file paths, line numbers, usage patterns.\"\n)\n\n// Agent 2: Find related code\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\", \n run_in_background=true,\n prompt=\"Find all code that imports, uses, or depends on [TARGET].\n Report: dependency chains, import graphs.\"\n)\n\n// Agent 3: Find similar patterns\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\",\n run_in_background=true,\n prompt=\"Find similar code patterns to [TARGET] in the codebase.\n Report: analogous implementations, established conventions.\"\n)\n\n// Agent 4: Find tests\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\",\n run_in_background=true,\n prompt=\"Find all test files related to [TARGET].\n Report: test file paths, test case names, coverage indicators.\"\n)\n\n// Agent 5: Architecture context\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\",\n run_in_background=true,\n prompt=\"Find architectural patterns and module organization around [TARGET].\n Report: module boundaries, layer structure, design patterns in use.\"\n)\n```\n\n## 1.2: Direct Tool Exploration (WHILE AGENTS RUN)\n\nWhile background agents are running, use direct tools:\n\n### LSP Tools for Precise Analysis:\n\n```typescript\n// Find definition(s)\nLspGotoDefinition(filePath, line, character) // Where is it defined?\n\n// Find ALL usages across workspace\nLspFindReferences(filePath, line, character, includeDeclaration=true)\n\n// Get file structure\nLspDocumentSymbols(filePath) // Hierarchical outline\nLspWorkspaceSymbols(filePath, query=\"[target_symbol]\") // Search by name\n\n// Get current diagnostics (directories need extension, e.g. extension=\".ts\")\nlsp_diagnostics(filePath)\n```\n\n### AST-Grep for Pattern Analysis:\n\n```typescript\n// Find structural patterns\nast_grep_search(\n pattern=\"function $NAME($$$) { $$$ }\", // or relevant pattern\n lang=\"typescript\", // or relevant language\n paths=[\"src/\"]\n)\n```\n\n### Grep for Text Patterns:\n\n```\ngrep(pattern=\"[search_term]\", path=\"src/\", include=\"*.ts\")\n```\n\n## 1.3: Collect Background Results\n\n```\nbackground_output(task_id=\"[agent_1_id]\")\nbackground_output(task_id=\"[agent_2_id]\")\n...\n```\n\n**Mark phase-1 as completed after all results collected.**\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 2: BUILD CODEMAP (DEPENDENCY MAPPING)\n\n**Mark phase-2 as in_progress.**\n\n## 2.1: Construct Definitive Codemap\n\nBased on Phase 1 results, build:\n\n```\n## CODEMAP: [TARGET]\n\n### Core Files (Direct Impact)\n- `path/to/file.ts:L10-L50` - Primary definition\n- `path/to/file2.ts:L25` - Key usage\n\n### Dependency Graph\n```\n[TARGET] \n\u251C\u2500\u2500 imports from: \n\u2502 \u251C\u2500\u2500 module-a (types)\n\u2502 \u2514\u2500\u2500 module-b (utils)\n\u251C\u2500\u2500 imported by:\n\u2502 \u251C\u2500\u2500 consumer-1.ts\n\u2502 \u251C\u2500\u2500 consumer-2.ts\n\u2502 \u2514\u2500\u2500 consumer-3.ts\n\u2514\u2500\u2500 used by:\n \u251C\u2500\u2500 handler.ts (direct call)\n \u2514\u2500\u2500 service.ts (dependency injection)\n```\n\n### Impact Zones\n| Zone | Risk Level | Files Affected | Test Coverage |\n|------|------------|----------------|---------------|\n| Core | HIGH | 3 files | 85% covered |\n| Consumers | MEDIUM | 8 files | 70% covered |\n| Edge | LOW | 2 files | 50% covered |\n\n### Established Patterns\n- Pattern A: [description] - used in N places\n- Pattern B: [description] - established convention\n```\n\n## 2.2: Identify Refactoring Constraints\n\nBased on codemap:\n- **MUST follow**: [existing patterns identified]\n- **MUST NOT break**: [critical dependencies]\n- **Safe to change**: [isolated code zones]\n- **Requires migration**: [breaking changes impact]\n\n**Mark phase-2 as completed.**\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 3: TEST ASSESSMENT (VERIFICATION STRATEGY)\n\n**Mark phase-3 as in_progress.**\n\n## 3.1: Detect Test Infrastructure\n\n```bash\n# Check for test commands\ncat package.json | jq '.scripts | keys[] | select(test(\"test\"))'\n\n# Or for Python\nls -la pytest.ini pyproject.toml setup.cfg\n\n# Or for Go\nls -la *_test.go\n```\n\n## 3.2: Analyze Test Coverage\n\n```\n// Find all tests related to target\ncall_oco_agent(\n subagent_type=\"explore\",\n run_in_background=false, // Need this synchronously\n prompt=\"Analyze test coverage for [TARGET]:\n 1. Which test files cover this code?\n 2. What test cases exist?\n 3. Are there integration tests?\n 4. What edge cases are tested?\n 5. Estimated coverage percentage?\"\n)\n```\n\n## 3.3: Determine Verification Strategy\n\nBased on test analysis:\n\n| Coverage Level | Strategy |\n|----------------|----------|\n| HIGH (>80%) | Run existing tests after each step |\n| MEDIUM (50-80%) | Run tests + add safety assertions |\n| LOW (<50%) | **PAUSE**: Propose adding tests first |\n| NONE | **BLOCK**: Refuse aggressive refactoring |\n\n**If coverage is LOW or NONE, ask user:**\n\n```\nTest coverage for [TARGET] is [LEVEL].\n\n**Risk Assessment**: Refactoring without adequate tests is dangerous.\n\nOptions:\n1. Add tests first, then refactor (RECOMMENDED)\n2. Proceed with extra caution, manual verification required\n3. Abort refactoring\n\nWhich approach do you prefer?\n```\n\n## 3.4: Document Verification Plan\n\n```\n## VERIFICATION PLAN\n\n### Test Commands\n- Unit: `bun test` / `npm test` / `pytest` / etc.\n- Integration: [command if exists]\n- Type check: `tsc --noEmit` / `pyright` / etc.\n\n### Verification Checkpoints\nAfter each refactoring step:\n1. lsp_diagnostics \u2192 zero new errors\n2. Run test command \u2192 all pass\n3. Type check \u2192 clean\n\n### Regression Indicators\n- [Specific test that must pass]\n- [Behavior that must be preserved]\n- [API contract that must not change]\n```\n\n**Mark phase-3 as completed.**\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 4: PLAN GENERATION (PLAN AGENT)\n\n**Mark phase-4 as in_progress.**\n\n## 4.1: Invoke Plan Agent\n\n```\nTask(\n subagent_type=\"plan\",\n prompt=\"Create a detailed refactoring plan:\n\n ## Refactoring Goal\n [User's original request]\n\n ## Codemap (from Phase 2)\n [Insert codemap here]\n\n ## Test Coverage (from Phase 3)\n [Insert verification plan here]\n\n ## Constraints\n - MUST follow existing patterns: [list]\n - MUST NOT break: [critical paths]\n - MUST run tests after each step\n\n ## Requirements\n 1. Break down into atomic refactoring steps\n 2. Each step must be independently verifiable\n 3. Order steps by dependency (what must happen first)\n 4. Specify exact files and line ranges for each step\n 5. Include rollback strategy for each step\n 6. Define commit checkpoints\"\n)\n```\n\n## 4.2: Review and Validate Plan\n\nAfter receiving plan from Plan agent:\n\n1. **Verify completeness**: All identified files addressed?\n2. **Verify safety**: Each step reversible?\n3. **Verify order**: Dependencies respected?\n4. **Verify verification**: Test commands specified?\n\n## 4.3: Register Detailed Todos\n\nConvert Plan agent output into granular todos:\n\n```\nTodoWrite([\n // Each step from the plan becomes a todo\n {\"id\": \"refactor-1\", \"content\": \"Step 1: [description]\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"verify-1\", \"content\": \"Verify Step 1: run tests\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"high\"},\n {\"id\": \"refactor-2\", \"content\": \"Step 2: [description]\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"medium\"},\n {\"id\": \"verify-2\", \"content\": \"Verify Step 2: run tests\", \"status\": \"pending\", \"priority\": \"medium\"},\n // ... continue for all steps\n])\n```\n\n**Mark phase-4 as completed.**\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 5: EXECUTE REFACTORING (DETERMINISTIC EXECUTION)\n\n**Mark phase-5 as in_progress.**\n\n## 5.1: Execution Protocol\n\nFor EACH refactoring step:\n\n### Pre-Step\n1. Mark step todo as `in_progress`\n2. Read current file state\n3. Verify lsp_diagnostics is baseline\n\n### Execute Step\nUse appropriate tool:\n\n**For Symbol Renames:**\n```typescript\nlsp_prepare_rename(filePath, line, character) // Validate rename is possible\nlsp_rename(filePath, line, character, newName) // Execute rename\n```\n\n**For Pattern Transformations:**\n```typescript\n// First identify the exact structural sites\nast_grep_search(pattern, lang, paths)\n\n// Then apply precise edits with Edit or symbol-safe LSP operations\nedit(filePath, oldString, newString)\n```\n\n**For Structural Changes:**\n```typescript\n// Use Edit tool for precise changes\nedit(filePath, oldString, newString)\n```\n\n### Post-Step Verification (MANDATORY)\n\n```typescript\n// 1. Check diagnostics (directories need extension, e.g. extension=\".ts\")\nlsp_diagnostics(filePath)\n\n// 2. Run tests\nbash(\"bun test\") // Or appropriate test command\n\n// 3. Type check\nbash(\"tsc --noEmit\") // Or appropriate type check\n```\n\n### Step Completion\n1. If verification passes \u2192 Mark step todo as `completed`\n2. If verification fails \u2192 **STOP AND FIX**\n\n## 5.2: Failure Recovery Protocol\n\nIf ANY verification fails:\n\n1. **STOP** immediately\n2. **REVERT** the failed change\n3. **DIAGNOSE** what went wrong\n4. **OPTIONS**:\n - Fix the issue and retry\n - Skip this step (if optional)\n - Consult oracle agent for help\n - Ask user for guidance\n\n**NEVER proceed to next step with broken tests.**\n\n## 5.3: Commit Checkpoints\n\nAfter each logical group of changes:\n\n```bash\ngit add [changed-files]\ngit commit -m \"refactor(scope): description\n\n[details of what was changed and why]\"\n```\n\n**Mark phase-5 as completed when all refactoring steps done.**\n\n---\n\n# PHASE 6: FINAL VERIFICATION (REGRESSION CHECK)\n\n**Mark phase-6 as in_progress.**\n\n## 6.1: Full Test Suite\n\n```bash\n# Run complete test suite\nbun test # or npm test, pytest, go test, etc.\n```\n\n## 6.2: Type Check\n\n```bash\n# Full type check\ntsc --noEmit # or equivalent\n```\n\n## 6.3: Lint Check\n\n```bash\n# Run linter\neslint . # or equivalent\n```\n\n## 6.4: Build Verification (if applicable)\n\n```bash\n# Ensure build still works\nbun run build # or npm run build, etc.\n```\n\n## 6.5: Final Diagnostics\n\n```typescript\n// Check all changed files\nfor (file of changedFiles) {\n lsp_diagnostics(file) // Must all be clean\n}\n```\n\n## 6.6: Generate Summary\n\n```markdown\n## Refactoring Complete\n\n### What Changed\n- [List of changes made]\n\n### Files Modified\n- `path/to/file.ts` - [what changed]\n- `path/to/file2.ts` - [what changed]\n\n### Verification Results\n- Tests: PASSED (X/Y passing)\n- Type Check: CLEAN\n- Lint: CLEAN\n- Build: SUCCESS\n\n### No Regressions Detected\nAll existing tests pass. No new errors introduced.\n```\n\n**Mark phase-6 as completed.**\n\n---\n\n# CRITICAL RULES\n\n## NEVER DO\n- Skip lsp_diagnostics check after changes\n- Proceed with failing tests\n- Make changes without understanding impact\n- Use `as any`, `@ts-ignore`, `@ts-expect-error`\n- Delete tests to make them pass\n- Commit broken code\n- Refactor without understanding existing patterns\n\n## ALWAYS DO\n- Understand before changing\n- Use `ast_grep_search` to confirm structural matches before editing\n- Verify after every change\n- Follow existing codebase patterns\n- Keep todos updated in real-time\n- Commit at logical checkpoints\n- Report issues immediately\n\n## ABORT CONDITIONS\nIf any of these occur, **STOP and consult user**:\n- Test coverage is zero for target code\n- Changes would break public API\n- Refactoring scope is unclear\n- 3 consecutive verification failures\n- User-defined constraints violated\n\n---\n\n# Tool Usage Philosophy\n\nYou already know these tools. Use them intelligently:\n\n## LSP Tools\nLeverage LSP tools for precision analysis. Key patterns:\n- **Understand before changing**: `LspGotoDefinition` to grasp context\n- **Impact analysis**: `LspFindReferences` to map all usages before modification\n- **Safe refactoring**: `lsp_prepare_rename` \u2192 `lsp_rename` for symbol renames\n- **Continuous verification**: `lsp_diagnostics` after every change\n\n## AST-Grep\nUse `ast_grep_search` to locate structural patterns that plain text grep would miss.\nApply the actual change with Edit or LSP after confirming the match shape.\n\n## Agents\n- `explore`: Parallel codebase pattern discovery\n- `plan`: Detailed refactoring plan generation\n- `oracle`: Read-only consultation for complex architectural decisions and debugging\n- `librarian`: **Use proactively** when encountering deprecated methods or library migration tasks. Query official docs and OSS examples for modern replacements.\n\n## Deprecated Code & Library Migration\nWhen you encounter deprecated methods/APIs during refactoring:\n1. Fire `librarian` to find the recommended modern alternative\n2. **DO NOT auto-upgrade to latest version** unless user explicitly requests migration\n3. If user requests library migration, use `librarian` to fetch latest API docs before making changes\n\n---\n\n**Remember: Refactoring without tests is reckless. Refactoring without understanding is destructive. This command ensures you do neither.**\n\n\n$ARGUMENTS\n\n";