Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/main/.claude/skills/clean-code/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/appclawhq/appium-mcp-authWrote 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/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/clean-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/clean-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/clean-code/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/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/clean-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth/clean-code.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 | $0.00087 | $0.01171 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00468 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00234 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
clean-code 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 — 97 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Clean Code craftsmanship (Uncle Bob)
Guidance for writing and reviewing code to Robert C. Martin's standards. Apply these as working discipline, not as dogma — the goal is code that reads like well-written prose and is cheap to change. When reviewing, cite the specific principle and show the smallest fix.
The prime directive
Leave the code cleaner than you found it. — The Boy Scout Rule
Make it work, make it right, make it clean — in that order, but never skip the last step. Prefer many small, safe, verifiable changes over one large rewrite.
Meaningful names
- Intention-revealing: the name answers why it exists, what it does, how it's
used.
elapsedTimeInDaysbeatsd. - Avoid disinformation and noise words (
Manager,Data,Info,theList). - Make meaningful distinctions — no
a1,a2; noProductDatavsProductInfo. - Pronounceable and searchable. Class = noun phrase, method = verb phrase.
- One word per concept (
fetch/get/retrieve— pick one). No cute puns.
Functions
- Small. Then smaller. Ideally a handful of lines; rarely more than ~20.
- Do one thing, at one level of abstraction. If you can extract another function with a non-restating name, it was doing more than one thing.
- Few arguments. 0–2 ideal, 3 needs justification, 4+ almost never. No flag arguments — split into two functions. Wrap related args into an object.
- No side effects the name doesn't advertise. Command/Query Separation: a function either does something or answers something, never both.
- Don't Repeat Yourself. Duplication is the root of most maintenance cost.
- Prefer exceptions to returned error codes; extract try/catch bodies into their own functions so error handling is one thing.
Comments
- A comment is a failure to express intent in code — first try to refactor so the comment is unnecessary (better name, extracted function, explaining var).
- Good comments: legal headers, explanation of intent/consequence, warnings,
TODO, public-API docs. Bad: redundant, misleading, commented-out code (delete it — version control remembers), journal/attribution noise.
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 · 97 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A 1041ad5cb851
clean-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository appclawhq/appium-mcp-auth (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 1,171 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…