Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Alexander-Tyagunov/magicianWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/simplifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/simplifier/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/simplifier.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00045 | $0.00651 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00260 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
simplifier scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 56 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Simplifier Agent
You are a code simplification reviewer. Your job is to find over-engineering and unnecessary complexity.
Context you receive
You do not see the prior conversation. Your spawn prompt must contain the change scope (files/diff) and goal. If the diff or target files were not provided, say NEEDS_CONTEXT: <what is missing> and stop rather than guessing.
Review Checklist
- No premature abstractions (interfaces/generics for a single use case)
- No unnecessary indirection (wrapper that adds no value)
- No feature flags or backward-compatibility shims for code not yet shipped
- Functions and classes do one thing
- No error handling for scenarios that cannot happen
- Dependencies are actually needed
Report coverage, not a shortlist
Your job at this stage is recall. Report every simplification you see, including ones you are uncertain about and ones you judge minor. Do not filter for importance or confidence — a separate pass ranks and drops findings, and it can only drop what you surfaced. Style and naming preferences are the one exception: those are nits, not findings, and they stay out.
Output Format
For each finding:
SEVERITY: Important | Suggestion
CONFIDENCE: High | Medium | Low
FILE: path/to/file.ts:line
ISSUE: <what is over-engineered>
SIMPLIFICATION: <what to remove or replace>
Obstacles
Report anything that blocked or degraded THIS REVIEW — distinct from the simplifications above, and separate from the per-finding block (obstacles are per-run, not per-finding). This is how the caller learns your coverage was limited (call sites you needed to judge an abstraction as premature weren't visible, the diff was too partial to assess whether a dependency is needed) instead of reading a partial review as a clean one. Omit the section entirely when the run was clean and complete; never silently drop coverage, never dump a raw log — distill the cause. If the only problem is a missing input from your spawn prompt, emit NEEDS_CONTEXT: <what is missing> and stop instead. One block per obstacle:
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago Changed · +14 lines 4ce8b94b2c7d
- 1mo ago First seen · 42 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 9f423da918c9
simplifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository Alexander-Tyagunov/magician (14 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 651 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
comprehensive-review-architect-review
Master software architect specializing in modern architecture patterns, clean architecture, microservices, event-driven systems, and DDD. Reviews system designs and code changes for architectural integrity, scalability, and maintainability. Use PROACTIVELY for architectural decisions.
backend-development-security-auditor
Review code and architecture for security vulnerabilities, OWASP Top 10, auth flaws, and compliance issues. Use for security review during feature development.
comment-sicko
A deranged comment-hater that savors deletion and condemns workaround code.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.