dead-code-detector
Dead Code Detector
Find and remove unused code across Python, TypeScript, and Rust codebases.
Tools by Language
| Language | Tool | Detects |
|---|---|---|
| Python | vulture v2.14+ | Unused imports, functions, classes, variables |
| TypeScript | knip v5.0+ | Unused exports, dependencies, files |
| Rust | cargo clippy + rustc lints |
Unused functions, imports, dead_code warnings |
Why these tools?
- vulture: AST-based, confidence scoring (60-100%), whitelist support
- knip: Successor to ts-prune (maintenance mode), monorepo-aware, auto-fix
- cargo clippy: Built-in to Rust toolchain, zero additional deps
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
- Cleaning up a codebase before release
- Refactoring to reduce maintenance burden
- Investigating bundle size / compile time issues
- Onboarding to understand what code is actually used
NOT for: Code duplication (use quality-tools:code-clone-assistant)
Quick Start Workflow
Python (vulture)
# Step 1: Install
uv pip install vulture
# Step 2: Scan with 80% confidence threshold
vulture src/ --min-confidence 80
# Step 3: Generate whitelist for false positives
vulture src/ --make-whitelist > vulture_whitelist.py
# Step 4: Re-scan with whitelist
vulture src/ vulture_whitelist.py --min-confidence 80
TypeScript (knip)
# Step 1: Install (project-local recommended)
bun add -d knip
# Step 2: Initialize config
bunx knip --init
# Step 3: Scan for dead code
bunx knip
# Step 4: Auto-fix (removes unused exports)
bunx knip --fix
Rust (cargo clippy)
# Step 1: Scan for dead code warnings
cargo clippy -- -W dead_code -W unused_imports -W unused_variables
# Step 2: For stricter enforcement
cargo clippy -- -D dead_code # Deny (error) instead of warn
# Step 3: Auto-fix what's possible
cargo clippy --fix --allow-dirty
Confidence and False Positives
Python (vulture)
| Confidence | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 100% | Guaranteed unused in analyzed files | Safe to remove |
| 80-99% | Very likely unused | Review before removing |
| 60-79% | Possibly unused (dynamic calls, frameworks) | Add to whitelist if intentional |
Common false positives (framework-invoked code):
- Route handlers / controller methods (invoked by web frameworks)
- Test fixtures and setup utilities (invoked by test runners)
- Public API surface exports (re-exported for consumers)
- Background job handlers (invoked by task queues / schedulers)
- Event listeners / hooks (invoked by event systems)
- Serialization callbacks (invoked during encode/decode)
TypeScript (knip)
Knip uses TypeScript's type system for accuracy. Configure in knip.json:
{
"entry": ["src/index.ts"],
"project": ["src/**/*.ts"],
"ignore": ["**/*.test.ts"],
"ignoreDependencies": ["@types/*"]
}
Rust
Suppress false positives with attributes:
#[allow(dead_code)] // Single item
fn intentionally_unused() {}
// Or module-wide
#![allow(dead_code)]
Integration with CI
Python (pyproject.toml)
[tool.vulture]
min_confidence = 80
paths = ["src"]
exclude = ["*_test.py", "conftest.py"]
TypeScript (package.json)
{
"scripts": {
"dead-code": "knip",
"dead-code:fix": "knip --fix"
}
}
Rust (Cargo.toml)
[lints.rust]
dead_code = "warn"
unused_imports = "warn"
Reference Documentation
For detailed information, see:
- Python Workflow - vulture advanced usage
- TypeScript Workflow - knip configuration
- Rust Workflow - clippy lint categories
Troubleshooting
| Issue | Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Reports framework-invoked code | Framework magic / callbacks | Add to whitelist or exclusion config |
| Misses dynamically loaded code | Not in static entry points | Configure entry points to include plugin/extension directories |
| Warns about test-only helpers | Test code compiled separately | Use conditional compilation or test-specific exclusions |
| Too many false positives | Threshold too low | Increase confidence threshold or configure ignore patterns |
| Missing type-only references | Compile-time only usage | Most modern tools handle this; check tool version |
Multi-Perspective Validation (Critical)
IMPORTANT: Before removing any detected "dead code", spawn parallel subagents to validate findings from multiple perspectives. Dead code may actually be unimplemented features or incomplete integrations.
Classification Matrix
| Finding Type | True Dead Code | Unimplemented Feature | Incomplete Integration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unused callable | No callers, no tests, no docs | Has TODO/FIXME, referenced in specs | Partial call chain exists |
| Unused export/public | Not imported anywhere | In public API, documented | Used in sibling module |
| Unused import/include | Typo, refactored away | Needed for side effects | Type-only or compile-time |
| Unused binding | Assigned but never read | Placeholder for future | Debug/instrumentation removed |
Validation Workflow
After running detection tools, spawn these parallel subagents:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Dead Code Findings │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
┌───────────────────┼───────────────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ Intent Agent │ │ Integration │ │ History Agent │
│ │ │ Agent │ │ │
│ - Check TODOs │ │ - Trace call │ │ - Git blame │
│ - Search specs │ │ chains │ │ - Commit msgs │
│ - Find issues │ │ - Check exports │ │ - PR context │
│ - Read ADRs │ │ - Test coverage │ │ - Author intent │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
│ │ │
└───────────────────┼───────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ AskUserQuestion: Confirm Classification │
│ [ ] True dead code - safe to remove │
│ [ ] Unimplemented - create GitHub Issue to track │
│ [ ] Incomplete - investigate integration gaps │
│ [ ] False positive - add to whitelist │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Agent Prompts
Intent Agent (searches for planned usage):
Search for references to [IDENTIFIER] in:
1. TODO/FIXME/HACK comments in codebase
2. Issue tracker (open and closed issues)
3. Design documents and architecture decision records
4. README and project documentation files
Report: Was this code planned but not yet integrated?
Integration Agent (traces execution paths):
For [IDENTIFIER], analyze:
1. All module import/include/use statements
2. Runtime module loading mechanisms (lazy loading, plugins)
3. Framework-invoked patterns (metadata attributes, config bindings, annotations)
4. Test files that may exercise this code path
Report: Is there a partial or indirect call chain?
History Agent (investigates provenance):
For [IDENTIFIER], check:
1. VCS blame/annotate - who wrote it and when
2. Commit message - what was the stated intent
3. Code review / merge request context - was it part of larger feature
4. Recent commits - was calling code removed or refactored
Report: Was this intentionally orphaned or accidentally broken?
Example: Validating Findings
# Step 1: Run detection tool for your language
<tool> <source-path> --confidence-threshold 80 > findings.txt
# Step 2: For each high-confidence finding, spawn validation
# (Claude Code will use Task tool with Explore agents)
Sample finding: unused function 'calculate_metrics' (src/analytics.py:45)
Multi-agent investigation results:
- Intent Agent: "Found TODO in src/dashboard.py:12 - 'integrate calculate_metrics here'"
- Integration Agent: "Function is imported in tests/test_analytics.py but test is marked skip/pending"
- History Agent: "Added in MR #234 'Add analytics foundation' - dashboard integration deferred"
Conclusion: NOT dead code - it's an unimplemented feature. Create tracking issue.
User Confirmation Flow
After agent analysis, use AskUserQuestion with multiSelect: true:
AskUserQuestion({
questions: [
{
question: "How should we handle these findings?",
header: "Action",
multiSelect: true,
options: [
{
label: "Remove confirmed dead code",
description: "Delete items verified as truly unused",
},
{
label: "Create issues for unimplemented",
description: "Track planned features in GitHub Issues",
},
{
label: "Investigate incomplete integrations",
description: "Spawn deeper analysis for partial implementations",
},
{
label: "Update whitelist",
description: "Add false positives to tool whitelist",
},
],
},
],
});
Risk Classification
| Risk Level | Criteria | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Low | 100% confidence, no references anywhere, >6 months old | Auto-remove with VCS commit |
| Medium | 80-99% confidence, some indirect references | Validate with agents first |
| High | <80% confidence, recent code, has test coverage | Manual review required |
| Critical | Public API surface, documented, has external dependents | NEVER auto-remove |
Sources
- vulture GitHub
- knip documentation
- Effective TypeScript: Use knip
- Rust dead_code lint
- DCE-LLM research paper (emerging LLM-based approach)