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 ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE --skill modular-code-enforcementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SEWrote 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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/modular-code-enforcement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/modular-code-enforcement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/modular-code-enforcement/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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/modular-code-enforcement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/modular-code-enforcement.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00051 | $0.01297 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00648 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00259 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
modular-code-enforcement 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 9d 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 — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Modular Code Architecture — Zero Tolerance Policy
This rule is NON-NEGOTIABLE. Violations BLOCK all further work until resolved.
Rule 1: index files are ENTRY POINTS, NOT dumping grounds
index files (index.ts, __init__.py, index.js, etc.) MUST ONLY contain:
- Re-exports (
export { ... } from "./module") - Factory function calls that compose modules
- Top-level wiring/registration (hook registration, plugin setup)
index files MUST NEVER contain:
- Business logic implementation
- Helper/utility functions
- Type definitions beyond simple re-exports
- Multiple unrelated responsibilities mixed together
If you find mixed logic in an index file: Extract each responsibility into its own dedicated file BEFORE making any other changes. This is not optional.
Rule 2: No Catch-All Files — utils/helpers/service are CODE SMELLS
A single utils, helpers, service, or common file is a gravity well — every unrelated function gets tossed in, and it grows into an untestable, unreviewable blob.
These file names are BANNED as top-level catch-alls. Instead:
| Anti-Pattern | Refactor To |
|---|---|
utils with formatDate(), slugify(), retry() |
date-formatter, slugify, retry |
service handling auth + billing + notifications |
auth-service, billing-service, notification-service |
helpers with 15 unrelated exports |
One file per logical domain |
Design for reusability from the start. Each module should be:
- Independently importable — no consumer should need to pull in unrelated code
- Self-contained — its dependencies are explicit, not buried in a shared grab-bag
- Nameable by purpose — the filename alone tells you what it does
If you catch yourself typing utils or service, STOP and name the file after what it actually does.
Rule 3: Single Responsibility Principle — ABSOLUTE
Every source file MUST have exactly ONE clear, nameable responsibility.
Self-test: If you cannot describe the file's purpose in ONE short phrase (e.g., "parses YAML frontmatter", "matches rules against file paths"), the file does too much. Split it.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 115 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A dc35d6896904
modular-code-enforcement is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE (252 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,297 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
refactor-advisor
A code review helper that finds common design and maintenance problems in a codebase and suggests ways to restructure the code.
pair-programming
A coding partner that writes code and then reviews that code for correctness, security, speed, readability, and reliability. It focuses on issues that can appear in AI-generated code, such as invented APIs or quietly changed requirements.
apply-findings
Apply findings by making the suggested code changes. Applies accepted verdicts, escalates ambiguous findings to the user, and offers to note genuine improvements for later. Use when the user asks to "apply findings", "apply fixes", "apply suggestions", "apply accepted findings", "fix the findings", or "apply the…
java-code-review
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
simplify-all
Run the code and documentation simplification passes together over one scope, launching every review agent concurrently before applying a single round of fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify all", "simplify everything", "simplify code and docs", "clean up code and docs", "run both simplify skills", or "simplify…