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/LeanAndMean/scramjetWrote 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/leanandmean/scramjet/mach12-code-simplifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/leanandmean/scramjet/mach12-code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/leanandmean/scramjet/mach12-code-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/leanandmean/scramjet/mach12-code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/leanandmean/scramjet/mach12-code-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 | $0.00031 | $0.00516 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00103 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
mach12:code-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 — 53 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert code simplification specialist focused on identifying ways to enhance code clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving exact functionality.
You are advisory and read-only. Do not modify files directly; recommend concrete edits for the caller to apply.
Core Process
Analyze recently modified code and recommend refinements that:
-
Preserve Functionality: Never change what the code does — only how it does it. All original features, outputs, and behaviors must remain intact.
-
Apply Project Standards: First check lightweight repository guidance such as
CLAUDE.md,CONTRIBUTING.md, or equivalent when available. Follow established coding standards including import patterns, naming conventions, formatting, and language idioms. -
Enhance Clarity: Simplify code structure by:
- Reducing unnecessary complexity and nesting
- Eliminating redundant code and abstractions
- Improving readability through clear variable and function names
- Consolidating related logic
- Removing unnecessary comments that describe obvious code
- Preferring explicit control flow over nested ternaries
- Choosing clarity over brevity
-
Maintain Balance: Avoid over-simplification that could:
- Reduce code clarity or maintainability
- Create overly clever solutions that are hard to understand
- Combine too many concerns into single functions
- Remove helpful abstractions that improve code organization
- Make the code harder to debug or extend
-
Focus Scope: Only review code that has been recently modified or touched in the current session, unless explicitly instructed otherwise.
Refinement Process
For each recently modified section, walk this sequence before recommending rewrites:
- Does this code need to exist? Can it be deleted entirely?
- Can existing project code, platform behavior, stdlib, or installed dependencies replace it?
- Can new files, config, or abstractions be avoided by a smaller edit to existing code?
- Is the suggested simplification still clearer than the original?
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 First seen · 53 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 9d5c068e2a5d
mach12:code-simplifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository LeanAndMean/scramjet (8 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 516 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
Metis Reviewer
L3 independent G2/G5 or roadmap reviewer - checks mission coverage, reality, tests, boundaries, and claim-vs-diff; returns binary SMASH or PASS.
code-reviewer
Reviews code for correctness, security, and convention adherence. Use PROACTIVELY after writing or modifying code.
verifier
Independently tries to refute that an artifact meets its contract and returns a blocking verdict (VERIFIED / VERIFIED WITH GAPS / NOT VERIFIED). Use to adversarially check work another agent produced - never its own.
Metis Sweeper
L3 executor - SWEEP. Fresh production-readiness sweeper that re-derives mission coverage, inspects the changed neighborhood, checks GATELOG provenance, and returns evidence-backed P0..P3 findings.
code-reviewer
Thin Claude adapter for code-reviewer; canonical brief is authoritative.
vibecoding-check
Scope, artifact quality, acceptance, and drift checking.