Sourcery

Where Sourcery shines

Sourcery is a refactoring assistant for Python. It reviews your code as you write, suggests clearer and faster patterns, and can auto-apply fixes across a file or repository. Think of it as a style- and quality-minded co-pilot that keeps functions small, readable, and testable.

Sourcery analyzes Python functions and classes and proposes refactorings that reduce complexity, improve readability, and align code with established best practices. It reads the abstract syntax tree rather than only scanning text, which allows it to detect patterns like nested conditionals, duplicated logic, and loops that can be expressed with comprehensions. The extension runs in editors and on pull requests, leaving comments that explain the reasoning behind each change. Teams can adopt rules that match internal style so the assistant not only cleans code but also harmonizes it with the rest of the repository. Over time this shifts effort away from format debates and toward behavior and tests, because many style and simplicity concerns are handled before review begins.

Sourcery works best as a continuous companion. Developers run it locally as they write code, accept small refactors with clear before and after, and let the pull request bot add suggestions that remain easy to review. The assistant is particularly effective on modules with many medium sized functions where complexity has accumulated gradually. When suggestions touch public interfaces or performance sensitive sections, the healthy habit is to isolate the refactor, run benchmarks if relevant, and merge behind the protection of tests. Teams that maintain type hints and docstrings give Sourcery more context, which improves the precision of its proposals. Over weeks the codebase trends toward lower cognitive load and new contributors ramp faster because idioms are consistent.

Automated refactoring is not a specification. The tool does not know the product goal behind a clever but unusual construct, and it can suggest changes that are correct but unhelpful in context. Owners should keep the right to decline any edit that obscures domain logic or harms performance. Test coverage remains the safety net that allows refactoring with confidence. For privacy and compliance, teams should review how cloud checks are configured and keep private code within approved boundaries. With tests, type hints, and a willingness to accept small improvements often, Sourcery reduces review fatigue and raises the baseline quality of Python code without erasing intent.

We like Sourcery because it catches the refactors that everyone means to do and rarely finds time for, and because it explains the why behind a suggestion. We do not like blind acceptance on hot paths where a change can shift performance characteristics in subtle ways. It could be better with project level controls that allow teams to pin or ban certain transformations so advice always aligns with house rules. The payoff is a cleaner codebase and reviews that focus on behavior. Security and privacy are straightforward when organizations configure checks and keep sensitive repositories under policy. Sourcery suits Python teams that value clarity and steady improvement. Its strength is actionable refactoring with reasons attached. Its weakness is that intent still lives with humans and tests.

At a glance

Coverage & data

Plans & limits

Prompts

Each block is a copy-ready prompt.

                                            
                                        Refactor this function for readability without changing behavior. Suggest variable renames and structure improvements.

Detect duplicate code in this snippet and merge it cleanly.

Review this pull request and highlight maintainability issues with examples.

Suggest idiomatic alternatives for this code in Python 3.

Provide a simpler version of this function while keeping performance stable.

                                            
                                        Explain this function to a junior developer and propose a simpler rewrite.

                                            
                                        Generate documentation comments for this class or function including parameters and return values.

                                            
                                        Identify anti patterns in this snippet and suggest best practices.

Community signal

Compared to similar tools

Sourcery is a Python refactor coach. Copilot/Codeium generate code; Ruff/Black format and lint; Sourcery improves structure and readability.

Similar tools teams compare

Windsurf

Flow-state coding with an AI that manages tasks and context

Pricing: Free tier + paid plans View →

Cody by Sourcegraph

Understand, navigate, and modify large codebases

Pricing: Free and paid plans View →

Codiga

Automate code quality and security checks

Pricing: Free tier available; paid plans offer advanced features and team collaboration starting at $10/month. View →

CodeFactor

Enhance code quality and team collaboration

Pricing: Offers a free tier for open-source projects and paid plans starting at $10/month for private repositories. View →

Google App Maker

Create internal business applications easily

Pricing: Included with G Suite Business and Enterprise editions; specific pricing varied by plan. View →

Codacy

Streamline code reviews and enhance security.

Pricing: Offers a free tier for open-source projects and paid plans for teams with advanced features and support. View →

Trying to decide? Compare these

Google App Maker

Create internal business applications easily

Pricing: Included with G Suite Business and Enterprise editions; specific pricing varied by plan. View details →

Codiga

Automate code quality and security checks

Pricing: Free tier available; paid plans offer advanced features and team collaboration starting at $10/month. View details →

Replit

Code, collaborate, and deploy instantly

Pricing: Offers a free tier with paid plans starting at $7/month for enhanced features and resources. View details →