KISS — Simplification Opportunity Detection

Analyze source code and architecture for simplification opportunities — places where accidental complexity can be reduced without losing capability. Produce actionable findings with severity ratings, dimension scores, code locations, and concrete simplification suggestions.

The framing matters: this is not about reporting what IS complex, but about identifying what CAN be simplified. Essential complexity (inherent to the problem domain) is not a simplification opportunity. Accidental complexity (introduced by our choices) is.

Dimensions

Five dimensions, each targeting a different axis of simplification:

| Dimension | Question It Answers | Reference | |-----------|-------------------|-----------| | Complexity | Where can control flow, cognitive load, or function structure be simplified? | references/complexity.md | | Abstraction | Where can unnecessary layers, interfaces, or indirection be removed? | references/abstraction.md | | Redundancy | Where can dead, duplicated, or unused code be eliminated? | references/redundancy.md | | Coupling | Where can dependencies be loosened or dependency chains shortened? | references/coupling.md | | Architecture | Where can system-level infrastructure or layering be consolidated? | references/architecture.md |

Subcommands

| Command Pattern | Scope | Reference | |----------------|-------|-----------| | kiss / kiss all / kiss check | All five dimensions | All references | | kiss complexity | Code Complexity | references/complexity.md | | kiss abstraction | Over-Abstraction | references/abstraction.md | | kiss redundancy | Redundancy | references/redundancy.md | | kiss coupling | Coupling & Dependencies | references/coupling.md | | kiss architecture | Architecture Complexity | references/architecture.md |

When no subcommand is specified, default to all five dimensions. When a dimension is mentioned by name (even without "kiss"), match it.

Workflow

1. Identify Target Code

Determine what code to analyze:

• When files or a directory are provided, use those.
• When a class/module is referenced by name, locate it.
• When ambiguous, ask which files or directories to scan.

Supported languages: any (Python, Java, TypeScript, C#, C++, Kotlin, Go, Rust, etc.). Adapt checks to the idioms of the target language — simplicity looks different across languages and paradigms.

2. Load Dimension References

Before analyzing, read the reference file(s) for the requested dimension(s):

• references/complexity.md — code complexity simplification
• references/abstraction.md — over-abstraction simplification
• references/redundancy.md — redundancy elimination
• references/coupling.md — coupling reduction
• references/architecture.md — architecture consolidation

For a full audit (kiss all), read all five.

3. Analyze

For each target file/class, apply the simplification patterns from the loaded references.

Per-dimension scoring: For each dimension analyzed, assign a score from 1–5:

| Score | Label | Meaning | |-------|-------|---------| | 1 | Minimal | Few or no simplification opportunities. Code is as simple as the problem allows. | | 2 | Low | Minor opportunities exist but are low-priority. | | 3 | Moderate | Several opportunities that would meaningfully reduce cognitive load or maintenance cost. | | 4 | High | Significant accidental complexity. Simplification would substantially improve the codebase. | | 5 | Critical | Accidental complexity dominates. The code is harder than the problem it solves. |

Think carefully about each pattern — not every heuristic match is a true opportunity. Consider context, project size, language idioms, and pragmatism. Essential complexity is not a simplification target.

4. Report Findings

Present findings using this structure:

Per Finding

**[DIMENSION] Simplification Opportunity — Severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW**
Location: `filename.py`, function `name`, lines ~XX-YY
Opportunity: What can be simplified and why simplifying it matters.
Approach: Concrete simplification with brief code sketch if helpful.

Severity guidelines:

• HIGH: Active maintenance pain, blocks understanding, or causes bugs. Simplifying this delivers immediate value.
• MEDIUM: Unnecessary complexity that will slow development as the codebase grows. Simplifying prevents future pain.
• LOW: Minor opportunity, worth noting but fine to defer.

Dimension Scores

After all findings, provide a dimension scorecard:

| Dimension     | Score | Label    |
|---------------|-------|----------|
| Complexity    | 3/5   | Moderate |
| Abstraction   | 2/5   | Low      |
| Redundancy    | 4/5   | High     |
| Coupling      | 2/5   | Low      |
| Architecture  | 1/5   | Minimal  |

Only include dimensions that were analyzed.

Summary

• Count table: | Dimension | HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW |
• Top 3 priorities: Which simplifications to tackle first and why.
• Overall assessment: One paragraph on the codebase's simplicity health — how much of its complexity is essential vs accidental, and the highest-leverage simplification theme.

5. Refactor Mode (Optional)

When a fix or simplification is requested (e.g., "fix this", "simplify it", "show me the simpler version"), produce simplified code that resolves the identified opportunities. Explain each change briefly.

Pragmatism Guidelines

These are guidelines, not laws. Apply judgment:

• Scale matters. Small utility scripts and prototypes get a lighter touch. Don't flag a 30-line script for having a few extra lines of defensive code.
• Conscious trade-offs are not violations. When a rationale exists for a design choice, acknowledge it rather than insisting on purity.
• Language idioms matter. Java naturally has more layers than Python. Go repeats error handling by design. Functional code uses composition patterns that look complex but are idiomatic. Judge against the language's norms.
• Prefer actionable over exhaustive. Five important findings beat twenty trivial ones. Focus on what delivers the most simplification value.
• Essential complexity is not a target. Complex domains produce complex code. KISS targets accidental complexity — the complexity we introduced, not the complexity the problem demands.
• Threshold awareness. Use the metric thresholds in each reference as guidelines, not rigid cutoffs. A function with cyclomatic complexity of 11 in a state machine is fine; the same in a utility helper is not.

Example Interaction

User: kiss complexity (with a file attached)

Claude:

1. Reads references/complexity.md
2. Analyzes the attached file for complexity simplification opportunities
3. Reports findings with locations, severity, and simplification approaches
4. Provides dimension score and summary with priorities