Pilot lab: refactor with intent preservation instead of style drift
A seeded refactor report that evaluates whether a system can improve structure while preserving behavior, boundaries, and local conventions.
The safer product behavior is the one that scopes the refactor tightly and explains why each structural change exists.
Model quality shows up in whether the system can distinguish meaningful simplification from cosmetic rewrites.
A good workflow outcome leaves the code clearer without making the reviewer re-validate unrelated areas.
Established product codebase with existing abstractions, naming conventions, and a request for structural improvement without behavior change.
Refactor the target area for clarity and maintainability while preserving interfaces, constraints, and local style conventions.
What this lab protects against
Refactors often look good in screenshots and still harm maintainability because they flatten boundaries that mattered.
The publication should reward refactors that:
- preserve intent,
- explain tradeoffs,
- and keep style drift contained.
Reviewer standard
If the agent improves one function by rewriting a whole module in its preferred style, the report should treat that as a workflow problem even if the final code looks clean.