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.
npx agentmods add commands/hamr0/agentic-toolkit/refactorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hamr0/agentic-toolkitWrote 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/hamr0/agentic-toolkit/refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hamr0/agentic-toolkit/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hamr0/agentic-toolkit/refactor.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 | $0.00008 | $0.01802 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00901 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00360 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00180 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 today.
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 — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor $ARGUMENTS.
Guardrails
- Spawn a worker and explicitly select your tool's mid tier. State the tier on the spawn — do not omit it and rely on a default. An omitted tier inherits the parent's tier, which is not the same thing as the balanced one. Pick the judgment-capable tier that is cheaper and faster than your top reasoning tier. Not the cheapest/fastest tier: on judgment work it measurably degrades (misclassification rates several times higher). Choose by tier, not by a vendor model name copied from this file — names drift, and this command ships to several tools. Fall back to running inline if your tool has no subagent mechanism.
- Escalate, never assume. Anything you cannot decide, cannot verify, or that this spec does not cover → stop and report it to the orchestrator (the main session). Never improvise, never widen scope, never fix a side issue you noticed along the way.
- The worker does the work itself — no delegation. The fixer must not spawn subagents of its own. Every edit it reports, and every test run it cites, has to be one it made or ran with its own tool calls: a relayed "I fixed it and the suite is green" from a sub-worker is hearsay, and this command's whole output is the claim that a change landed and the tests still pass. A fix that delegates its work is a report about a report.
- The HITL gates below belong to the orchestrator, not the worker. A subagent cannot hold a conversation with the user, so it cannot run a gate that ends in stop and ask. When one trips — a failing test, a crossed public API boundary, a change bigger than the bullet asked for — the worker stops there and hands the situation back, with the options and its reasoning but no choice made. The orchestrator asks. A worker that picks revert / patch / update-test on the user's behalf has answered a question it was never allowed to ask.
- Edit only what a surviving bullet names. Ledger mode's scope is the bullets that survive revalidation, one change per bullet — not the neighbouring code, not the formatting, not a second finding noticed on the way past. Anything else goes back to the orchestrator to become a new bullet.
- Prove the blast radius with two checks, because neither sees what the
other does.
git status --porcelainat exit must list only files a surviving bullet named — that is this command's scope guarantee, and unlike/branch-reviewit is not expected to be empty. It cannot police the memory directory:.claude/is normally gitignored, so porcelain stays empty whether you deleted a fixed bullet, wrote nothing, or overwroteMEMORY.md. So also takemd5sum .claude/remember/*before you start and again before you report, and show the comparison: onlyfix-ledger.mdmay differ.last-review.mdin particular is/branch-review's to write — a fixer that touches it forges the gate that judges its own work.
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.
- today Changed · +6 lines 9ab8b8f5b2cc
- 2d ago First seen · 122 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A 800984bb498b
refactor is a command published in the GitHub repository hamr0/agentic-toolkit (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 1,802 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
OPSX: Archive
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
OPSX: Explore
Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, clarify requirements.
OPSX: Verify
Verify implementation matches change artifacts before archiving.
OPSX: Apply
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental).
OPSX: Continue
Continue working on a change - create the next artifact (Experimental).
OPSX: Propose
Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step.