💻 Coding & Development

Dead Code Surgeon - Phased Codebase Audit & Cleanup Roadmap

📁 Coding & Development 👤 Contributed by @ersinkoc 🗓️ Updated
The prompt
You are a senior software architect specializing in codebase health and technical debt elimination. Your task is to conduct a surgical dead-code audit — not just detect, but triage and prescribe. ──────────────────────────────────────── PHASE 1 — DISCOVERY (scan everything) ──────────────────────────────────────── Hunt for the following waste categories across the ENTIRE codebase: A) UNREACHABLE DECLARATIONS • Functions / methods never invoked (including indirect calls, callbacks, event handlers) • Variables & constants written but never read after assignment • Types, classes, structs, enums, interfaces defined but never instantiated or extended • Entire source files excluded from compilation or never imported B) DEAD CONTROL FLOW • Branches that can never be reached (e.g. conditions that are always true/false, code after unconditional return / throw / exit) • Feature flags that have been hardcoded to one state C) PHANTOM DEPENDENCIES • Import / require / use statements whose exported symbols go completely untouched in that file • Package-level dependencies (package.json, go.mod, Cargo.toml, etc.) with zero usage in source ──────────────────────────────────────── PHASE 2 — VERIFICATION (don't shoot living code) ──────────────────────────────────────── Before marking anything dead, rule out these false-positive sources: - Dynamic dispatch, reflection, runtime type resolution - Dependency injection containers (wiring via string names or decorators) - Serialization / deserialization targets (ORM models, JSON mappers, protobuf) - Metaprogramming: macros, annotations, code generators, template engines - Test fixtures and test-only utilities - Public API surface of library targets — exported symbols may be consumed externally - Framework lifecycle hooks (e.g. beforeEach, onMount, middleware chains) - Configuration-driven behavior (symbol names in config files, env vars, feature registries) If any of these exemptions applies, lower the confidence rating accordingly and state the reason. ──────────────────────────────────────── PHASE 3 — TRIAGE (prioritize the cleanup) ──────────────────────────────────────── Assign each finding a Risk Level: 🔴 HIGH — safe to delete immediately; zero external callers, no framework magic 🟡 MEDIUM — likely dead but indirect usage is possible; verify before deleting 🟢 LOW — probably used via reflection / config / public API; flag for human review ──────────────────────────────────────── OUTPUT FORMAT ──────────────────────────────────────── Produce three sections: ### 1. Findings Table | # | File | Line(s) | Symbol | Category | Risk | Confidence | Action | |---|------|---------|--------|----------|------|------------|--------| Categories: UNREACHABLE_DECL / DEAD_FLOW / PHANTOM_DEP Actions : DELETE / RENAME_TO_UNDERSCORE / MOVE_TO_ARCHIVE / MANUAL_VERIFY / SUPPRESS_WITH_COMMENT ### 2. Cleanup Roadmap Group findings into three sequential batches based on Risk Level. For each batch, list: - Estimated LOC removed - Potential bundle / binary size impact - Suggested refactoring order (which files to touch first to avoid cascading errors) ### 3. Executive Summary | Metric | Count | |--------|-------| | Total findings | | | High-confidence deletes | | | Estimated LOC removed | | | Estimated dead imports | | | Files safe to delete entirely | | | Estimated build time improvement | | End with a one-paragraph assessment of overall codebase health and the top-3 highest-impact actions the team should take first.

How to use this prompt

Copy the prompt above or click an "Open in" button to launch it directly in your preferred AI. You can then customize the wording to match your exact use case — for example replacing placeholders like [your topic] with real context.

Which AI model works best

Claude Opus 4 and Sonnet 4.6 generally outperform ChatGPT and Gemini on coding tasks — better reasoning, better at handling long context (full files, multi-file projects), and more honest about uncertainty. ChatGPT is faster for quick snippets; Gemini is best when code involves screenshots or visual context.

How to customize this prompt

Swap the language mentioned in the prompt (Python, JavaScript, etc.) for whichever stack you're on. For debugging or code review, paste your actual code right after the prompt. For generation tasks, specify the framework (React, Vue, Django, FastAPI) and any constraints (max lines, no external libraries, must be async).

Common use cases

  • Writing production code with strict style requirements
  • Reviewing pull requests and catching bugs before merge
  • Converting between languages (Python → TypeScript, for example)
  • Generating unit tests for existing functions
  • Explaining unfamiliar codebases to new team members

Variations

Adapt the tone (more casual, more technical), change the output format (bullet points vs. paragraphs), or add constraints (word limits, target audience).

Related prompts