code-refactor-for-reproducibility

Use when refactoring research code for publication, adding documentation to existing analysis scripts, creating reproducible computational workflows, or preparing code for sharing with collaborators. Transforms research code into publication-ready, reproducible workflows. Adds documentation, implements error handling, creates environment specifications, and ensures computational reproducibility for scientific publications.

53 stars

Best use case

code-refactor-for-reproducibility is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Use when refactoring research code for publication, adding documentation to existing analysis scripts, creating reproducible computational workflows, or preparing code for sharing with collaborators. Transforms research code into publication-ready, reproducible workflows. Adds documentation, implements error handling, creates environment specifications, and ensures computational reproducibility for scientific publications.

Teams using code-refactor-for-reproducibility should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.

When to use this skill

  • You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.

When not to use this skill

  • You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
  • You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.

Installation

Claude Code / Cursor / Codex

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/code-refactor-for-reproducibility/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills/main/scientific-skills/Data Analysis/code-refactor-for-reproducibility/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/code-refactor-for-reproducibility/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How code-refactor-for-reproducibility Compares

Feature / Agentcode-refactor-for-reproducibilityStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Use when refactoring research code for publication, adding documentation to existing analysis scripts, creating reproducible computational workflows, or preparing code for sharing with collaborators. Transforms research code into publication-ready, reproducible workflows. Adds documentation, implements error handling, creates environment specifications, and ensures computational reproducibility for scientific publications.

Where can I find the source code?

You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.

Related Guides

SKILL.md Source

> **Source**: [https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills](https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills)
# Research Code Reproducibility Refactoring Tool

## When to Use

- Use this skill when the task needs Use when refactoring research code for publication, adding documentation to existing analysis scripts, creating reproducible computational workflows, or preparing code for sharing with collaborators. Transforms research code into publication-ready, reproducible workflows. Adds documentation, implements error handling, creates environment specifications, and ensures computational reproducibility for scientific publications.
- Use this skill for data analysis tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format.
- Use this skill when you need a documented fallback path for missing inputs, execution errors, or partial evidence.

## Key Features

- Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Use when refactoring research code for publication, adding documentation to existing analysis scripts, creating reproducible computational workflows, or preparing code for sharing with collaborators. Transforms research code into publication-ready, reproducible workflows. Adds documentation, implements error handling, creates environment specifications, and ensures computational reproducibility for scientific publications.
- Packaged executable path(s): `scripts/main.py`.
- Structured execution path designed to keep outputs consistent and reviewable.

## Dependencies

- `Python`: `3.10+`. Repository baseline for current packaged skills.
- `numpy`: `unspecified`. Declared in `requirements.txt`.
- `pandas`: `unspecified`. Declared in `requirements.txt`.
- `pytest`: `unspecified`. Declared in `requirements.txt`.
- `scipy`: `unspecified`. Declared in `requirements.txt`.
- `src`: `unspecified`. Declared in `requirements.txt`.

## Example Usage

```bash
cd "20260318/scientific-skills/Data Analytics/code-refactor-for-reproducibility"
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
```

Example run plan:
1. Confirm the user input, output path, and any required config values.
2. Edit the in-file `CONFIG` block or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings.
3. Run `python scripts/main.py` with the validated inputs.
4. Review the generated output and return the final artifact with any assumptions called out.

## Implementation Details

See `## Workflow` above for related details.

- Execution model: validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable.
- Input controls: confirm the source files, scope limits, output format, and acceptance criteria before running any script.
- Primary implementation surface: `scripts/main.py`.
- Parameters to clarify first: input path, output path, scope filters, thresholds, and any domain-specific constraints.
- Output discipline: keep results reproducible, identify assumptions explicitly, and avoid undocumented side effects.

## Quick Check

Use this command to verify that the packaged script entry point can be parsed before deeper execution.

```bash
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
```

## Audit-Ready Commands

Use these concrete commands for validation. They are intentionally self-contained and avoid placeholder paths.

```bash
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
```

## Workflow

1. Confirm the user objective, required inputs, and non-negotiable constraints before doing detailed work.
2. Validate that the request matches the documented scope and stop early if the task would require unsupported assumptions.
3. Use the packaged script path or the documented reasoning path with only the inputs that are actually available.
4. Return a structured result that separates assumptions, deliverables, risks, and unresolved items.
5. If execution fails or inputs are incomplete, switch to the fallback path and state exactly what blocked full completion.

## Workflow Overview

Follow this sequence when refactoring a research codebase:

1. **Analyze** — identify reproducibility issues in existing code
2. **Refactor** — apply documentation, parameterization, and error handling
3. **Specify environment** — pin dependencies and create environment files
4. **Validate** — run tests and verify behaviour is unchanged

---

## Step 1: Analyze Code for Reproducibility Issues

Read each source file and check for the following problems. Document findings before making any changes.

**Checklist:** missing docstrings · hardcoded absolute paths · missing random seeds · bare `except:` clauses · unpinned imports · unexplained magic numbers

**Example — detecting issues manually:**

```python
import ast, pathlib

def find_hardcoded_paths(source: str) -> list[str]:
    """Return string literals that look like absolute paths."""
    tree = ast.parse(source)
    return [
        node.s for node in ast.walk(tree)
        if isinstance(node, ast.Constant)
        and isinstance(node.s, str)
        and node.s.startswith("/")
    ]

source = pathlib.Path("analysis.py").read_text()
print(find_hardcoded_paths(source))
```

---

## Step 2: Refactor for Best Practices

Apply improvements in place. Always back up originals first.

### 2a. Add docstrings

```python

# Before
def load_data(path):
    import pandas as pd
    return pd.read_csv(path)

# After
def load_data(path: str) -> "pd.DataFrame":
    """Load a CSV dataset from disk.

    Parameters
    ----------
    path : str
        Path to the CSV file (relative to project root).

    Returns
    -------
    pd.DataFrame
        Raw dataset with original column names preserved.
    """
    import pandas as pd
    return pd.read_csv(path)
```

### 2b. Parameterize hardcoded values

```python
from pathlib import Path
import argparse

def parse_args():
    parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
    parser.add_argument("--data", type=Path, default=Path("data/raw.csv"))
    parser.add_argument("--output", type=Path, default=Path("results/"))
    return parser.parse_args()

args = parse_args()
df = pd.read_csv(args.data)
args.output.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
```

### 2c. Set random seeds

```python
import random
import numpy as np

SEED = 42  # document this constant at module level

random.seed(SEED)
np.random.seed(SEED)

# scikit-learn
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestClassifier
clf = RandomForestClassifier(random_state=SEED)

# PyTorch
import torch
torch.manual_seed(SEED)
torch.backends.cudnn.deterministic = True
```

### 2d. Add error handling and logging

```python
import logging
from pathlib import Path

logging.basicConfig(level=logging.INFO, format="%(asctime)s [%(levelname)s] %(message)s")
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

def load_data(path: Path) -> "pd.DataFrame":
    """Load dataset with validation."""
    import pandas as pd
    if not path.exists():
        raise FileNotFoundError(f"Data file not found: {path}")
    logger.info("Loading data from %s", path)
    df = pd.read_csv(path)
    if df.empty:
        raise ValueError(f"Loaded dataframe is empty: {path}")
    logger.info("Loaded %d rows, %d columns", *df.shape)
    return df
```

---

## Step 3: Generate Environment Specifications

See `references/environment-setup.md` for full Dockerfile and Conda environment templates.

### requirements.txt (pip)

```text
pip install pipreqs
pipreqs src/ --output requirements.txt --force
```

Verify resolution:
```text
python -m venv .venv_test && source .venv_test/bin/activate
pip install -r requirements.txt
python -c "import pandas, numpy, sklearn"
deactivate && rm -rf .venv_test
```

### environment.yml (Conda)

```yaml
name: my-research-env
channels:
  - conda-forge
  - defaults
dependencies:
  - python=3.9
  - numpy=1.24.3
  - pandas=2.0.1
  - scikit-learn=1.2.2
  - matplotlib=3.7.1
  - pip:
    - some-pip-only-package==0.5.0
```

```text
conda env create -f environment.yml
conda activate my-research-env
```

---

## Step 4: Create Documentation

### README structure

Generate a `README.md` containing at minimum:

```markdown

## Requirements
<!-- List Python version and key packages with versions -->

## Installation
```text
conda env create -f environment.yml
conda activate my-research-env
```

## Data
<!-- Describe input data format, source, and where to place files -->

## Running the Analysis
```text
python main.py --data data/raw.csv --output results/
```

## Expected Outputs
<!-- Describe files created and how to interpret them -->

## Reproducing Results
- Random seed: 42 (set in `config.py`)
- Hardware: results validated on CPU; GPU results may differ slightly
```

---

## Step 5: Validate Reproducibility

After all changes, verify that behaviour is unchanged:

```text

# 1. Run the full pipeline and capture output checksums
python main.py --data data/raw.csv --output results/
md5sum results/*.csv > checksums_refactored.md5
diff checksums_original.md5 checksums_refactored.md5

# 2. Run unit tests
pytest tests/ -v --tb=short

# 3. Confirm determinism across two clean runs
python main.py --output results_run1/
python main.py --output results_run2/
diff -r results_run1/ results_run2/
```

**Reproducibility verification checklist:**
- [ ] Output checksums match pre-refactor baseline
- [ ] All tests pass
- [ ] Pipeline runs twice and produces identical outputs
- [ ] `requirements.txt` / `environment.yml` installs cleanly in a fresh environment
- [ ] No absolute paths remain in source files
- [ ] Random seeds are set and documented
- [ ] All public functions have docstrings
- [ ] README contains complete reproduction instructions

---

## Best Practices Summary

| Practice |
|---|
| Relative paths only |
| Pin dependency versions |
| Set random seeds |
| Docstrings on all public functions |
| Validate outputs against a baseline |
| Automate environment setup |

## References

- `references/guide.md` — Comprehensive user guide
- `references/environment-setup.md` — Dockerfile and full environment templates
- `references/examples/` — Working code examples
- `references/api-docs/` — Complete API documentation

---

**Skill ID**: 455 | **Version**: 1.0 | **License**: MIT

## Output Requirements

Every final response should make these items explicit when they are relevant:

- Objective or requested deliverable
- Inputs used and assumptions introduced
- Workflow or decision path
- Core result, recommendation, or artifact
- Constraints, risks, caveats, or validation needs
- Unresolved items and next-step checks

## Error Handling

- If required inputs are missing, state exactly which fields are missing and request only the minimum additional information.
- If the task goes outside the documented scope, stop instead of guessing or silently widening the assignment.
- If `scripts/main.py` fails, report the failure point, summarize what still can be completed safely, and provide a manual fallback.
- Do not fabricate files, citations, data, search results, or execution outcomes.

## Input Validation

This skill accepts requests that match the documented purpose of `code-refactor-for-reproducibility` and include enough context to complete the workflow safely.

Do not continue the workflow when the request is out of scope, missing a critical input, or would require unsupported assumptions. Instead respond:

> `code-refactor-for-reproducibility` only handles its documented workflow. Please provide the missing required inputs or switch to a more suitable skill.

## Response Template

Use the following fixed structure for non-trivial requests:

1. Objective
2. Inputs Received
3. Assumptions
4. Workflow
5. Deliverable
6. Risks and Limits
7. Next Checks

If the request is simple, you may compress the structure, but still keep assumptions and limits explicit when they affect correctness.

Related Skills

reproducibility-check

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Check whether a paper’s Methods section contains all information needed for replication; use when preparing a manuscript for submission or reviewing methodological completeness.

skill-auditor

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

A comprehensive auditor for any agent skill — including Manus, OpenClaw/ClawHub, Claude, LobeHub, or custom SKILL.md-based skills. Use this skill whenever a user wants to evaluate, audit, review, score, or quality-check an agent skill before publishing, updating, or deploying. Covers two hard veto gates (structural redlines + research integrity redlines), static quality scoring across 25 criteria (ISO 25010 + OpenSSF + Agent), dynamic test input generation, multi-mode execution testing, multi-layer output evaluation with five specialized category rubrics (Evidence Insight / Protocol Design / Data Analysis / Academic Writing / Other), a Research Veto that applies to all four research categories, human eval viewer generation, actionable P0/P1/P2 optimization recommendations, and automatic skill improvement that outputs a polished, production-ready SKILL.md. Also use whenever a user says "audit my skill", "evaluate my skill", "improve my skill", or wants a corrected version after evaluation.

two-sample-mr-research-planner

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates complete two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) research designs from a user-provided research direction. Use when users want to design, plan, or build a study using two-sample MR to test causal relationships. Triggers:"design a two-sample MR study", "build a publishable MR paper", "test whether this biomarker causally affects this disease", "generate Lite/Standard/Advanced MR plans", "screen multiple exposures with MR", "bidirectional MR design", "causal inference using GWAS summary statistics", or "I want to study X and Y using MR". Always outputs four workload configurations (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with a recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, and publication upgrade path.

research-proposal-generator

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates a comprehensive research proposal design based on input literature, including hypothesis, mechanism verification, and budget. Use when the user wants to design a research project from a paper.

research-grants

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Write competitive research proposals for NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, and Taiwan's NSTC when you need agency-compliant narratives, budgets, and review-criteria alignment for a specific solicitation/FOA/BAA.

protocol-standardization

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Standardize fragmented experimental steps into reproducible protocol documents when you need method organization, lab SOP drafting, or cross-operator reproducibility; missing parameters must be explicitly marked as "To be supplemented/Not provided".

prospero-registration-helper

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Assists researchers in generating PROSPERO registration content for meta-analyses from a title and optional protocol. Use when the user wants to draft a PROSPERO registration form.

non-tumor-ml-research-planner

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates complete non-tumor biomedical machine learning research designs from a user-provided research direction. Always use this skill when users want to plan bioinformatics + ML papers for non-cancer diseases (metabolic, cardiovascular, kidney, inflammatory, autoimmune, infectious, neurological, endocrine, wound healing, chronic multifactor), design diagnostic biomarker studies, combine GEO datasets with feature selection and ML modeling, or generate Lite/Standard/Advanced/Publication+ workload plans. Trigger for:"non-tumor ML study", "bioinformatics paper outside oncology", "key genes and diagnostic model for a disease", "pyroptosis/ferroptosis/senescence/autophagy + disease", "GEO datasets + machine learning", "RF + LASSO diagnostic model", "DEG + feature selection + validation", "immune infiltration + biomarker", "non-cancer biomarker paper". Trigger even for casual phrasings like "I want to study X using machine learning", "help me design a non-tumor bioinformatics paper", or "how do I build a diagnostic model for disease Y".

network-tox-docking-research-planner

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates complete network toxicology + molecular docking research designs from a user-provided toxicant and disease/phenotype. Always use this skill when users want to investigate how an environmental toxicant, endocrine disruptor, heavy metal, food contaminant, pharmaceutical residue, or consumer product chemical may contribute to a disease through shared molecular targets, hub genes, pathways, and docking evidence. Trigger for:"network toxicology study", "toxicology mechanism paper", "target prediction + PPI + docking", "environmental pollutant and disease mechanism", "hub genes and docking for toxicant", "Lite/Standard/Advanced toxicology plan", "CTD + SwissTargetPrediction + GeneCards + STRING", "CB-Dock2 docking study", "triclosan/BPA/cadmium/PFAS + disease". Also triggers for Chinese phrasings:"网络毒理学研究设计"、"毒物机制论文"、"靶点预测+PPI+对接"、"环境污染物与疾病机制". Trigger even for casual phrasings like "I want to study how chemical X affects disease Y" or "help me design a toxicology paper". Always output four workload configurations (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with a recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, and publication upgrade path.

meta-protocol-writer

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates a PROSPERO-compliant Meta-analysis protocol based on Title and PICOS. Use when the user wants to write a protocol for a systematic review or meta-analysis.

hypothesis-generation

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Structured scientific hypothesis formulation from observations; use when you have experimental observations or preliminary data and need testable hypotheses with predictions, mechanisms, and validation experiments.

hypogenic

53
from aipoch/medical-research-skills

Automated LLM-driven hypothesis generation and testing for tabular datasets; use when you need systematic exploration of empirical patterns (e.g., fraud detection, content analysis) and want to combine literature insights with data-driven hypothesis evaluation.