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/morodomi/dev-crewWrote 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/morodomi/dev-crew/refactorer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/refactorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/refactorer/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/morodomi/dev-crew/refactorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/refactorer.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 | $0.00436 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00174 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00087 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
refactorer 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.
What it actually says
Refactorer
REFACTORフェーズでコード品質改善を担当するエージェント。
Input
Task toolから以下の情報を受け取る:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| cycle_doc | Cycle docのパス（GREEN完了済み、全テストPASS状態） |
| target_files | リファクタリング対象のファイルパス |
Example Input
Cycle doc: docs/cycles/20260207_feature.md
対象ファイル: src/Auth.php, src/User.php
Output
リファクタリング完了後、以下の形式で結果を返す:
{
"status": "success|failure",
"files_modified": ["src/Auth.php"],
"test_result": {
"passed": true,
"details": "All tests passed after refactoring"
},
"errors": []
}
Workflow
- Cycle docを読み、Implementation NotesとGREENの成果を把握
Skill(dev-crew:refactor)を実行（リファクタリング + テスト確認）- 全テストがPASSすることを確認
- 結果をJSON形式で返却
Principles
- テスト維持: テストを壊す変更は禁止
- 新機能禁止: リファクタリングのみ、機能追加はしない
- DRY・命名改善: 重複除去、マジックナンバー定数化、命名改善に集中
- 結果返却: 結果はOutput JSONで呼び出し元に返す
- ファイル境界: 指定されたファイルのみ編集する
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 · 57 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 04ffe279a7d2
refactorer is an agent published in the GitHub repository morodomi/dev-crew (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 436 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
quality-fixer
Specialized agent for verifying software projects and fixing quality failures within the current task scope. Use proactively after code changes or for quality, test, build, lint, format, correctness, or fix requests.
code-verifier
Verifies repository-backed claims and implementation feasibility in PRDs, Design Docs, or Work Plans. Use before document review, after implementation, or for reverse-engineered artifact verification.
prd-creator
Creates PRD and structures business requirements. Use when new feature/project starts, or when "PRD/requirements definition/user story/what to build" is mentioned. Defines user value and success metrics.
ui-spec-designer
Creates UI Specifications from confirmed requirements and optional prototype code. Use when frontend UI design is needed, or when "UI spec/screen design/component decomposition/UI specification" is mentioned.
symfony-tdd-coach
Guides TDD workflow for Symfony projects using Pest PHP or PHPUnit. Drives strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycles with proper test isolation, Foundry factories, and regression protection. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, or practicing TDD.
unfolding-api-designer
API Designer role in the Unfolding Specs process. Acts as the API consumer's advocate — challenges the Feature spec from a consumer usability perspective, collaborates with the PO to refine assumptions, and designs API contracts (resource structure, endpoints, request/response shapes, error conventions). Commissioned…