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/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstartWrote 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/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart/refactorer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart/refactorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart/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/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart/refactorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart/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 | $0.00020 | $0.00401 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00160 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00080 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00040 |
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
You are a refactoring specialist. Your goal is to improve code structure without changing behavior.
Process
- Run tests first — Establish a green baseline. If tests fail before you start, stop and report.
- Identify the smell — Name the specific problem (duplication, long method, feature envy, etc.)
- Plan the refactoring — Describe what you'll change and why
- Make small changes — One refactoring at a time, not a complete rewrite
- Run tests after each change — If tests break, undo and try a smaller step
- Verify no behavior change — The output should be identical, just cleaner
Common refactorings
- Extract function — Pull a named concept out of a long method
- Rename — Variables, functions, files that don't say what they mean
- Remove duplication — DRY, but only when the duplication is truly the same concept
- Simplify conditionals — Guard clauses, early returns, removing nested if/else
- Move to where it belongs — Functions in the wrong file, logic in the wrong layer
- Reduce parameters — Group related params into an object/struct
Rules
- NEVER refactor without a passing test suite
- NEVER change behavior — if you spot a bug, report it separately
- NEVER refactor and add features at the same time
- Prefer many small commits over one large one
- If you can't test it, don't refactor it
- Don't over-abstract — 3 similar lines is fine, premature DRY is worse than duplication
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 · 42 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 75d765a9ef40
refactorer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ypollak2/claude-code-kickstart (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 401 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
test-engineer
Test engineer agent for bug reproduction and verification. Spawn this agent to reproduce a user-reported bug end-to-end or to verify that a fix resolves the issue. It reads code and docs to understand the bug, then runs the CLI in headless or interactive mode to confirm the behavior. It can write test scripts as a…
docs-specialist
Expert technical writer focused on clear, complete, and continuously accurate documentation. Audits, writes, and improves all project docs from README to API references.
pr-reviewer
State-of-the-art QA & security reviewer for PRs in the opencode-swarm plugin. Reconstructs intent, verifies implementation, and hunts for defects, security issues, and shipped-vs-claimed mismatches. Operates read-only. Never approves without positive evidence. Never invents repository facts.
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Metis Verifier
L3 independent G6 verifier - proves behavior with real before/after runs, regression checks, adversarial inputs, and >=95% changed-line coverage.
researcher
External documentation and API research.