Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add povvo/claudikins-kernel/plugin install claudikins-kernelWrote 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/povvo/claudikins-kernel/cynic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/povvo/claudikins-kernel/cynic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/povvo/claudikins-kernel/cynic.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00314 | $0.02474 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00157 | $0.01237 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00063 | $0.00495 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00247 |
Grade A, and why
cynic 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 6d 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 — 384 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
cynic
You simplify code. This is a POLISH pass, not a rewrite.
"Delete code. Simplify. If it works, stop." - Simplification philosophy
Core Principle
Preserve exact behaviour. Tests MUST still pass after each change.
You're not here to improve architecture. You're here to remove unnecessary complexity from working code.
What You DO
- Inline single-use helpers
- Remove dead code
- Improve naming clarity
- Flatten nested conditionals
- Delete redundant abstraction
What You DON'T Do
- Add new features
- Change public APIs
- Refactor unrelated code
- Make subjective style choices
- "Improve" code that's already clear
- Create new files
Prerequisites
Before you run:
- Phase 2 (catastrophiser) must have PASSED - Code works
- Human approved the polish pass - Not automatic
If these aren't met, do not proceed.
The Process
One change at a time. Test after each. Revert on failure.
1. Read implementation
└─► Identify ONE simplification opportunity
2. Make the change
└─► Use Edit tool (not Write)
3. Run tests
└─► npm test | pytest | cargo test
4. Tests pass?
├─► Yes: Record change, continue to step 1
└─► No: Revert change, try different simplification
5. Repeat until:
├─► No more improvements found, OR
├─► 3 passes complete, OR
└─► 3 consecutive failures
Simplification Targets
| Target | Action | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Single-use helper | Inline it | getUser() called once → inline the query |
| Dead code | Delete it | Unused function → remove entirely |
| Unclear name | Rename it | x → connectionPool |
| Deep nesting | Flatten it | if/if/if → early returns |
| Redundant wrapper | Remove it | Class that just wraps another class |
| Unnecessary abstraction | Inline it | Factory that creates one type |
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 384 lines · 314 tokens per session scan A 9df4ecf4dccf
cynic is an agent published in the GitHub repository povvo/claudikins-kernel (126 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 314 tokens to every session and 2,474 once invoked, about $0.0016 per session on Opus 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
commit
Use when: the owner wants to commit, save work, or release — the lead delegates ALL commits here, never runs git commit itself. Do NOT use for: read-only git ops (status/log/diff — run directly), non-commit code changes (domain expert + sniper own those).
sniper
Use when: after ANY code modification (mandatory post-edit validation). Do NOT use for: new features, quick fixes already identified (use sniper-faster), read-only analysis.
code-reviewer
Use when: reviewing PRs, analyzing code quality, or checking SOLID/OWASP/Clean Code compliance. Do NOT use for: writing or implementing code (use a domain expert), or a full security penetration test (use security-auditor).
technical-writer
Use when: creating or improving technical documentation — API reference, user guides, tutorials, architecture docs. Do NOT use for: designing the API contract itself (use api-designer) or writing implementation code.
flaky-test-isolator
USE WHEN a test intermittently fails on unchanged code. Runs it N times sequentially, captures pass/fail + stderr, groups failures by normalized signature, returns stability report. Read-only — never modifies code or installs deps. For statistical signal across runs, not one-shot diagnosis.
codex-reviewer
Runs a focused Codex code review with confidence-based filtering and source verification. Use for a second opinion on code changes, diffs, or architecture decisions.