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/sifxprime/kodelyth-eccWrote 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/sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc/refactor-clean)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc/refactor-clean"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc/refactor-clean/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/sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc/refactor-clean"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc/refactor-clean.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 | $0.00661 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00264 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
refactor-clean 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.
Copies of this mod
5 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- refactor-clean — 92% identical, 6 lines differ
- refactor-clean — 92% identical, 35 lines differ
- refactor-clean — 92% identical, 6 lines differ
- ccc-refactor-clean — 89% identical, 135 lines differ
- refactor-clean — 86% identical, 5 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor Clean
Safely identify and remove dead code with test verification at every step.
Step 1: Detect Dead Code
Run analysis tools based on project type:
| Tool | What It Finds | Command |
|---|---|---|
| knip | Unused exports, files, dependencies | npx knip |
| depcheck | Unused npm dependencies | npx depcheck |
| ts-prune | Unused TypeScript exports | npx ts-prune |
| vulture | Unused Python code | vulture src/ |
| deadcode | Unused Go code | deadcode ./... |
| cargo-udeps | Unused Rust dependencies | cargo +nightly udeps |
If no tool is available, use Grep to find exports with zero imports:
# Find exports, then check if they're imported anywhere
Step 2: Categorize Findings
Sort findings into safety tiers:
| Tier | Examples | Action |
|---|---|---|
| SAFE | Unused utilities, test helpers, internal functions | Delete with confidence |
| CAUTION | Components, API routes, middleware | Verify no dynamic imports or external consumers |
| DANGER | Config files, entry points, type definitions | Investigate before touching |
Step 3: Safe Deletion Loop
For each SAFE item:
- Run full test suite — Establish baseline (all green)
- Delete the dead code — Use Edit tool for surgical removal
- Re-run test suite — Verify nothing broke
- If tests fail — Immediately revert with
git checkout -- <file>and skip this item - If tests pass — Move to next item
Step 4: Handle CAUTION Items
Before deleting CAUTION items:
- Search for dynamic imports:
import(),require(),__import__ - Search for string references: route names, component names in configs
- Check if exported from a public package API
- Verify no external consumers (check dependents if published)
Step 5: Consolidate Duplicates
After removing dead code, look for:
- Near-duplicate functions (>80% similar) — merge into one
- Redundant type definitions — consolidate
- Wrapper functions that add no value — inline them
- Re-exports that serve no purpose — remove indirection
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 · 85 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 617d7dd684b1
refactor-clean is a command published in the GitHub repository sifxprime/kodelyth-ecc (11 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 661 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
maintainer-review-error-handling
Review the PR for error-handling correctness — surfaced errors, no silent swallows, consistent error patterns (Pi-tuned).
refactor-clean
Safely identify and remove dead code with test verification.
refactor-clean
Refactor provided code for cleanliness, maintainability, and alignment with SOLID principles and modern best practices — no over-engineering.
modify
Command "modify" from MartyBonacci/specswarm, covering user input, flag parsing, parse flags from arguments, mode routing and goal.
Diagnose
Run a 20-point health check across the plugin install, project config, PM/notification reachability, docs freshness, board consistency, and git state. Read-only — never changes state. Reports each check as PASS/WARN/FAIL/SKIP with an actionable fix. Target under 15 seconds end-to-end. Use before demos, after a plugin…
bmad-review-edge-case-hunter
Walk every branching path and boundary condition in content, report only unhandled edge cases. Orthogonal to adversarial review - method-driven not attitude-driven. Use when you need exhaustive edge-case analysis of code, specs, or diffs.