---
name: compose-recomposition-performance
description: Use when investigating Jetpack Compose recomposition performance, skippable/restartable composables, composables.txt or compiler reports, Layout Inspector recomposition counts, or frame-rate State reads in composition vs layout/draw, and it is not yet clear whether the cause is parameter stability or deferred reads. Technique-layer skill — complements the codebase-specific compose-expert.
---

# Compose recomposition performance

Router only — deep fixes live in [`compose-stability-diagnostics`](../compose-stability-diagnostics/SKILL.md) and [`compose-state-deferred-reads`](../compose-state-deferred-reads/SKILL.md).

## Two axes

1. **Parameter stability / skipping** — can Compose skip this restartable composable; are arguments stable and comparable?
2. **Where `State` is read** — is frame-rate `State` read during composition vs layout/draw?

Either axis can dominate; they combine independently.

## Route here → focused skill

| Primary suspicion | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Skipping, unstable params, compiler/`composables.txt` churn | [`compose-stability-diagnostics`](../compose-stability-diagnostics/SKILL.md) |
| Frame-rate `State` read phase (composition vs layout/draw) | [`compose-state-deferred-reads`](../compose-state-deferred-reads/SKILL.md) |
| Evidence for both | Apply both skills in parallel |

## Review order

1. Decide which axis fits the evidence; open the matching skill.
2. If unclear, sample both — stability churn vs composition-phase reads of fast `State`.
3. Re-measure after changes.

## When NOT to apply

- Recomposition tracks real data changes, or the bug is correctness not cost.
- No profiler / compiler signal suggests a problem.