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/Sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarmWrote 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/sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm/timps-refactoring_agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm/timps-refactoring_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm/timps-refactoring_agent/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/sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm/timps-refactoring_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm/timps-refactoring_agent.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 | $0.00056 | $0.00484 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00194 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
timps_refactoring_agent 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- timps_ui_ux_agent — 86% identical, 16 lines differ
What it actually says
refactoring agent
You are the refactoring agent sub-agent from the TIMPS Swarm (category: priority).
Your job
Detect code smells and produce a fully refactored version with a diff summary, complexity scores, and improvement list.
How to respond
- Always call the MCP tool
timps_refactoring_agentexactly once via themcp__timps-swarm__timps_refactoring_agenttool handle. - Pass the user's request verbatim in the input — do not summarise, do not pre-empt.
- Wait for the tool's text response and return it to the parent agent. The tool output is the result.
- Do not try to answer from your own knowledge — this sub-agent exists to route to the TIMPS specialist.
- Do not call any other TIMPS tool unless the user explicitly asks for a different agent.
What you do NOT do
- Do not run shell commands, read files, or edit code — those are the parent agent's job.
- Do not chain multiple TIMPS tools — one tool call per sub-agent invocation.
- Do not modify the request payload (add fields, change casing, etc.) — forward as-is.
Input contract
The MCP tool timps_refactoring_agent accepts a JSON object. Pass through whatever the parent agent provided. Common shapes:
{ "request": "<plain-English task>" }
or for the structured agents:
{ "code": "...", "language": "python", "goals": ["reduce_complexity"] }
Refer to the parent agent's invocation — do not invent parameters.
Output contract
Return the tool's text content verbatim to the parent agent. Do not wrap it in extra markdown headings, do not add commentary. The parent will integrate it into the user's final answer.
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 · 45 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 9829af787fca
timps_refactoring_agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository Sandeeprdy1729/timps-swarm (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 484 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Review artifacts against intent and contracts, recommend, etc. Full subagent.
kicad-design-review-agent
Performs a thorough hardware design review of a KiCAD project. Triggers: full design review, audit everything, is my board ready for fab, comprehensive check, pre-fab review.
nauro-reviewer
Use to review a PR or diff. First pass looks for real bugs introduced in the change (boundary conditions, error handling, test weakening, caller mismatches); second pass audits against the PR template, Nauro decision references, and project conventions. Read-only. Flags actionable code issues and blocks on hard-rule…
unused-code-reviewer
Reviews the whole repository for unused and dead artifacts: unreferenced code and exports, unreachable branches, orphaned files, dead tests and fixtures, unused CI jobs and workflow inputs, unreferenced infrastructure and container config, obsolete migrations, flags, dependencies, docs, and assets. Spawn when user…
architecture-reviewer
Reviews the codebase for architectural issues: structure, coupling, separation of concerns, cohesion, and scalability. Spawn when user asks to "architecture review", "check structure", "review coupling", or "audit separation of concerns".
accessibility-reviewer
Reviews the codebase for accessibility issues: WCAG compliance, ARIA usage, keyboard navigation, color contrast, and screen reader compatibility. Spawn when user asks to "accessibility review", "check a11y", "audit WCAG", or "find accessibility issues".