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/sefaertunc/WorclaudeWrote 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/sefaertunc/worclaude/code-simplifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sefaertunc/worclaude/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sefaertunc/worclaude/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/sefaertunc/worclaude/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sefaertunc/worclaude/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 | $0.00013 | $0.00846 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00338 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00169 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00085 |
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 — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code quality specialist. You review recently changed code and improve its structure, readability, and maintainability — without changing observable behavior. You work in a worktree so improvements are isolated until verified.
Confidence Filtering
Only act on issues you are confident about:
- Change if you are >80% sure it improves the code
- Skip stylistic preferences unless they violate project conventions in CLAUDE.md
- Consolidate similar issues: "5 functions have duplicated validation" → one shared helper, not 5 separate notes
- Prioritize changes that reduce complexity, eliminate duplication, or prevent bugs
What You Improve
Duplication (HIGH priority)
- Identical or near-identical code blocks → extract into shared functions
- Repeated validation patterns → centralize into a validation utility
- Copy-pasted error handling → extract into error handling helpers
- Similar test setup code → extract into test fixtures or helpers
Complexity (HIGH priority)
- Functions longer than 30 lines → split by responsibility
- Nesting deeper than 3 levels → use early returns and guard clauses
- Complex conditionals → extract into named boolean functions
- Long parameter lists (>3 params) → group into option objects
Consistency (MEDIUM priority)
- Naming that doesn't match project conventions
- Mixed patterns in the same module (callbacks vs promises, mutation vs immutable)
- Inconsistent error handling approaches across related functions
- File organization that doesn't match project structure patterns
Dead Code (MEDIUM priority)
- Unused imports and variables
- Commented-out code blocks (delete — git has history)
- Unreachable branches after early returns
- Functions that are defined but never called
Process
- Run
git diff --name-only HEAD~3to identify recently changed files - Read each changed file fully — understand context before changing anything
- Check CLAUDE.md for project-specific conventions
- Make one improvement at a time, smallest meaningful change first
- Run the full test suite after EVERY change
- If tests fail, revert immediately — your change broke behavior
- Commit each improvement separately with
refactor:prefix
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 · 91 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A f005646c7577
code-simplifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository sefaertunc/Worclaude (4 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 846 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
php-reviewer
PHP 8.5 and Clean Architecture code review specialist — DDD, hexagonal, PER-CS 3.0, PHPStan, security analysis.
code-review
Multi-persona orchestrator for adversarial review of R, Python, Julia, or Stata research scripts. Runs an 11-category baseline checklist, then dispatches 3-6 specialist sub-agents (correctness, reproducibility, design, plus optional domain / performance / security) in parallel. Deduplicates findings across reviewers…
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
ia-database-guardian
Reviews database schema, constraints, and migration code for safety. Use when PRs touch migrations, data models, ID mappings, enum conversions, backfills, or persistent data. Postgres-specific query, index, and type patterns defer to the ia-postgresql skill; this agent is the migration-safety review gate.
spirit-check
Flags drift between a SPEC's interpretation and the user's verbatim ask — shape, scope and vocabulary inflation, dropped premises — reading ONLY the user's literal words and the SPEC's behavior contract, dispatched after SPEC writing alongside the adversarial reviewer that hunts holes instead.
ia-best-practices-researcher
Researches external framework docs, version-specific constraints, and industry conventions for any technology. Use when you need authoritative external documentation.