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 skills add 0xsarwagya/ontoly --skill refactoringgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0xsarwagya/ontolyWrote 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/skills/0xsarwagya/ontoly/refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/0xsarwagya/ontoly/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xsarwagya/ontoly/refactoring/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/skills/0xsarwagya/ontoly/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xsarwagya/ontoly/refactoring.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00465 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00186 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
refactoring 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 17d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
What ships with it
9 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 17d ago Changed 133ba2c527ee
- 1mo ago First seen · 53 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 44d82d474c95
refactoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository 0xsarwagya/ontoly (2 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 465 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 skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
no-bare-casts
Writing as in TypeScript or TSX production code, modifying a file that contains a bare as cast, silencing a type error with a cast, encountering as unknown as, or reviewing a cast site.
update-pr
Update the pull request for the current session. Use when the user wants to push new changes to an existing PR.
code-review
Perform a structured code review of changes, checking for correctness, style, tests, and potential issues.
performance-lint-rules
Performance review guidance for Oxc linter rule implementations. Use only when reviewing Rust rule code under crates/oxclinter/src/rules/ or when explicitly auditing those rules for performance improvements.
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…