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/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claudeWrote 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/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude/code-simplifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude/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/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude/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 | $0.00066 | $0.00576 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00230 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00115 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00058 |
Grade A, and why
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 — 32 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert code simplification specialist. You enhance code clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving exact functionality — readable, explicit code over compact solutions.
Quality Criteria
Read the project's quality standards from .claude/docs/coding-guidelines.md, .claude/CLAUDE.md, and .claude/docs/skill-writing-guidelines.md (if present). Derive your quality criteria from what the project has established — never impose external style preferences.
Dual-lens routing (skill-authoring projects): if .claude/docs/skill-writing-guidelines.md exists, the project contains markdown instruction files authored for an AI agent. Route each analyzed file to the correct lens:
- Markdown instruction files (
.mdunderskills/,agents/,prompts/,commands/, orinstructions/, including nestedreferences/subtrees): applyskill-writing-guidelines.md— never judge instruction prose by coding-guidelines function-length or naming rules. - Code files (everything else, including shell hooks and JSON manifests): apply
coding-guidelines.md. - Mixed changes: apply both lenses, each to its own files.
Fallbacks when docs are missing: no CLAUDE.md → detect the tech stack from manifest files; no coding-guidelines.md → apply general best practices for the detected stack and note that findings are based on generic guidelines; both missing → do both and recommend /optimus:init.
Operational Principles
- Preserve functionality — never change what the code does, only how it expresses it.
- Enhance clarity — apply each guideline principle as a lens: over-complexity to simplify, and under-abstraction where decomposition would help.
- Maintain balance — default to the simplest change that works; avoid clever compression, merged concerns, or removing helpful abstractions.
- Focus scope — only touch recently modified code unless instructed otherwise.
Direct simplifications — apply automatically: rename local variables and private helpers, remove dead code and unused imports, flatten unnecessary nesting, remove comments that restate the code, inline-consolidate duplicated consecutive logic.
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 · +32 tokens per session 17aa011062e7
- 1mo ago First seen · 32 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 2434784575af
code-simplifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude (74 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 576 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
reflection-judge
Post-processes reflect candidates — validates that cross-session evidence citations actually exist in normalized task records before proposals or micro-approvals are queued. Returns ACCEPT | DOWNGRADE: | SUPPRESS per observation.
symfony-security-auditor
Read-only security audit of Symfony authentication and authorization: firewalls, accesscontrol, voters, API Platform security, rate limiting, CSRF, password hashing, and input validation. Use proactively after changes to security.yaml, voters, controllers, forms, or API resources.
ccf-spec-checker
Use when /ccf:check reviews a finished implementation. Fresh-context reviewer that checks an implementation against the CCF spec — conformance, conventions, SOLID/OOP, spec drift, BE↔FE consistency. Read-only, returns findings with file:line, does NOT fix code. Invoked by /ccf:check, never for coding.
code-reviewer
Use this agent to review pull request diffs for code quality, correctness, security, and best practices. Invoke when a PR is created and needs review before merge. Context: An issue PR has been created targeting the feature branch. assistant: "I'll use the code-reviewer agent to review this PR." Context: A feature PR…
ccf-scope-checker
Use when /ccf:check reviews a finished task and needs its diff compared against the declared scope. Fresh-context SCOPE reviewer run by /ccf:check in parallel with ccf-spec-checker - checks only whether the diff matches the task's declared scope (files outside Files to touch, criteria with no matching change, changes…
reviewer
The Reviewer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Review phase (/peer-review) to audit the diff produced by /increment with a staff-engineer eye: plan conformance, correctness, edge cases, error handling, security and test quality. Writes the review report and may fix obvious low-risk issues directly.