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/hculap/better-codeWrote 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/hculap/better-code/fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hculap/better-code/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hculap/better-code/fix/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/hculap/better-code/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hculap/better-code/fix.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 | $0.01140 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00456 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00228 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00114 |
Grade A, and why
fix 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 — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Standards Fix
Auto-refactor $ARGUMENTS to fix code standards violations. Uses conservative mode - shows plan first, asks for confirmation before each change.
If no argument provided, analyze and offer to fix violations in the current directory.
Fix Process
Step 1: Analyze Violations
First, perform the same analysis as /code-standards:check to identify all violations.
Categorize violations by type:
- File too large - needs splitting
- Function too large - needs extraction
- High complexity - needs simplification
- Mixed responsibilities - needs separation
Step 2: Generate Fix Plan
For each violation, propose a specific fix:
## Fix Plan
Found 4 violations in $ARGUMENTS. Here's the proposed fix plan:
### 1. Split `src/services/order.ts` (912 LOC → ~300 LOC each)
**Current:** Single file handling all order logic
**Proposed:** Split into 3 files:
- `src/services/order-creation.ts` - createOrder, validateOrder
- `src/services/order-processing.ts` - processOrder, handlePayment
- `src/services/order-fulfillment.ts` - shipOrder, trackOrder
**Impact:**
- Creates 3 new files
- Updates imports in 5 dependent files
- Original file will be deleted
### 2. Extract from `processPayment` (complexity 22 → ~8 each)
**Current:** Large switch statement for payment methods
**Proposed:** Strategy pattern with separate handlers:
- `PaymentProcessor` interface
- `CreditCardProcessor`, `PayPalProcessor`, `BankTransferProcessor`
**Impact:**
- Creates 4 new classes
- Simplifies `processPayment` to dispatcher
### 3. Extract validation from `createUser` (78 LOC → ~25 LOC)
**Current:** Validation mixed with user creation
**Proposed:** Extract to `validateUserData()` function
**Impact:**
- Adds 1 new function
- Reduces `createUser` by ~50 LOC
### 4. Split `formatData` helper (62 LOC → ~20 LOC each)
**Current:** Handles multiple data types in one function
**Proposed:** Split by type:
- `formatUserData()`, `formatOrderData()`, `formatProductData()`
**Impact:**
- Adds 3 new functions
- Original function becomes dispatcher
---
**Total changes:** 3 file splits, 2 function extractions, 8 new functions/classes
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 · 159 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 7816ebf4866b
fix is a command published in the GitHub repository hculap/better-code (2 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,140 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 commands, from other repositories
sm-buff
You usually don't run buff directly — run sm sail. sm sail drives the whole PR to green and calls buff watch / triage for you, stopping only when it needs you to act (see /sm-sail). Reach for sm buff here only for surgical work: inspecting a specific failure, or resolving a single review thread when sail has parked on…
sm-scour
Run slop-mop's comprehensive pre-PR sweep for this repository.
latent-review
Quick latent review of code using structured hidden-state reasoning.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
simplify
The over-engineering review: five tags (delete, stdlib, native, yagni, shrink), a mandatory replacement per finding, and a real null result when there is nothing to cut.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.