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/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereignWrote 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/commands/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign/simplicity-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign/simplicity-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign/simplicity-review/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/commands/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign/simplicity-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign/simplicity-review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00291 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00146 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00058 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00029 |
Grade A, and why
simplicity-review 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 10d 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
Review the current diff (or the files I name) against the MoE Sovereign Complexity Decision Ladder.
For each finding, output exactly:
- File:line — what was found
- Ladder step violated — which of the 5 steps was skipped
- Suggested simplification — concrete alternative (one line if possible)
- Exempt? — yes/no and reason if yes
Format: bullet list only. No preamble, no summary. If nothing is overengineered, output exactly: "No findings — ladder satisfied."
The ladder:
- Is this necessary? (YAGNI)
- Does the stdlib/FastAPI/Pydantic provide it?
- Does an already-installed dependency cover it?
- Can it be one line?
- Is this the minimum that works?
Always exempt — do not flag:
- The inference fallback chain in
services/inference.py(explicit architecture) - The 14-package split from
main.py(deliberate refactor, not overengineering) - Anything in
docs/system/(compliance docs require completeness) - Any
local_only=Trueenforcement logic (data sovereignty — non-negotiable) - VRAM budget checks (hardware constraint — non-negotiable)
- Security invariants: timing-safe auth, SSRF protection, input validation
- Explicitly requested features
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 28 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A b86decc03850
simplicity-review is a command published in the GitHub repository h3rb3rn/moe-sovereign (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 291 tokens. 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 commands, from other repositories
review
Perform a comprehensive code review on the following target.
review
Perform a comprehensive code review with actionable feedback.
show_diff
Call the showdiff MCP tool to show me a side-by-side visual diff (it returns an image in the chat). If I passed a checkpoint sha in $ARGUMENTS, diff that checkpoint; otherwise show my current uncommitted changes.
conformance
Assess architecture conformance — ADR decision implementation, cross-decision consistency, design-principles alignment, architecture drift, technical debt, and custom constraint rules.
dld-review
Review Detailed Design (DLD) for implementation readiness.
refactor-clean
Safely identify and remove dead code with test verification at every step.