--- name: karpathy-principles description: Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes — Think Before Coding, Simplicity First, Surgical Changes, Goal-Driven Execution. --- # Karpathy Coding Principles Derived from [Andrej Karpathy's observations](https://x.com/karpathy/status/2015883857489522876) on LLM coding pitfalls. **Tradeoff:** These guidelines bias toward caution over speed. For trivial tasks, use judgment. ## When to Apply - **Classification**: quick-win, feature, architecture-change, hotfix - **Phase**: /plan (assumption surfacing), /implement (simplicity + surgical), /review (scope audit) - **Trigger**: All non-trivial coding tasks — this is a behavioral baseline, not a domain skill ## 1. Think Before Coding **Don't assume. Don't hide confusion. Surface tradeoffs.** Before implementing: - State your assumptions explicitly. If uncertain, ask. - If multiple interpretations exist, present them — don't pick silently. - If a simpler approach exists, say so. Push back when warranted. - If something is unclear, stop. Name what's confusing. Ask. ## 2. Simplicity First **Minimum code that solves the problem. Nothing speculative.** - No features beyond what was asked. - No abstractions for single-use code. - No "flexibility" or "configurability" that wasn't requested. - No error handling for impossible scenarios. - If you write 200 lines and it could be 50, rewrite it. Self-check: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify. ## 3. Surgical Changes **Touch only what you must. Clean up only your own mess.** When editing existing code: - Don't "improve" adjacent code, comments, or formatting. - Don't refactor things that aren't broken. - Match existing style, even if you'd do it differently. - If you notice unrelated dead code, mention it — don't delete it. When your changes create orphans: - Remove imports/variables/functions that YOUR changes made unused. - Don't remove pre-existing dead code unless asked. The test: **Every changed line should trace directly to the user's request.** ## 4. Goal-Driven Execution **Define success criteria. Loop until verified.** Transform tasks into verifiable goals: - "Add validation" → "Write tests for invalid inputs, then make them pass" - "Fix the bug" → "Write a test that reproduces it, then make it pass" - "Refactor X" → "Ensure tests pass before and after" For multi-step tasks, state a brief plan: ``` 1. [Step] → verify: [check] 2. [Step] → verify: [check] 3. [Step] → verify: [check] ``` Strong success criteria let you loop independently. Weak criteria ("make it work") require constant clarification. ## Checklist During /plan: - [ ] Assumptions stated explicitly before proposing solution - [ ] Ambiguities surfaced — multiple interpretations presented if they exist - [ ] Simplest viable approach chosen (justify if not the simplest) During /implement: - [ ] No features beyond what was asked - [ ] No abstractions for single-use code - [ ] Every changed line traces to the user's request - [ ] Pre-existing code left alone unless directly required - [ ] Success criteria defined before implementation begins During /review: - [ ] Diff contains only requested changes — no drive-by refactoring - [ ] Code is not overcomplicated — could a simpler version work? - [ ] Orphaned imports/variables from THIS change are cleaned up - [ ] Pre-existing dead code mentioned but not deleted ## Code Simplification Checklist When reviewing or refactoring, apply Chesterton's Fence — understand WHY before removing: - [ ] Deep nesting (>3 levels) → extract to named functions - [ ] Long functions (>50 lines) → split by responsibility - [ ] Poor naming → rename to reveal intent - [ ] Speculative abstractions → remove if only one caller exists - [ ] Duplicate logic → extract only if 3+ occurrences (not 2) **Simplification rules:** - Preserve behavior exactly — simplification is NOT a feature change - Fewer lines is not always simpler — a 1-line nested ternary is worse than a 5-line if/else - Separate simplification commits from feature commits — never mix ## Heading-Scoped Read Note For phase-entry loading, read only: - `When to Apply` - `Checklist` - `Code Simplification Checklist` Load numbered principle sections (`## 1`–`## 4`), `Common Rationalizations`, `Anti-Patterns`, and `References` on full read or cache miss only. ## Common Rationalizations | Rationalization | Reality | |---|---| | "It works, that's good enough" | Working code that's unreadable or architecturally wrong creates debt that compounds. | | "We'll clean it up later" | Later never comes. The current phase is the quality gate — use it. | | "I'm confident about this approach" | Confidence is not evidence. State your assumptions explicitly or verify against docs. | | "This abstraction might be useful later" | Don't preserve speculative abstractions. If there's only one caller, inline it. | | "I'll just quickly improve this unrelated code too" | Unscoped changes create noisy diffs and obscure the actual intent. Touch only what you must. | | "The tests pass, so it's good" | Tests are necessary but not sufficient. They don't catch architecture problems, security issues, or readability. | ## Anti-Patterns - **Silent assumption**: Picking one interpretation without surfacing alternatives - **Speculative flexibility**: Adding config/abstraction layers "for the future" - **Drive-by cleanup**: "Improving" adjacent code that wasn't part of the request - **Vague completion**: Claiming "done" without verifiable success criteria - **Rationalizing shortcuts**: Using plausible-sounding excuses to skip verification steps ## References - Source: [multica-ai/andrej-karpathy-skills](https://github.com/multica-ai/andrej-karpathy-skills) (MIT declared upstream; no root LICENSE artifact; provenance asserted) - Simplification enrichment: [addyosmani/agent-skills — code-simplification](https://github.com/addyosmani/agent-skills) (MIT) - Complements: `writing-plans` (Think Before Coding), `verification-before-completion` (Goal-Driven Execution) - Guardrails: `.agent/rules/engineering_guardrails.md` §7 Scope Discipline