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 bcastelino/agent-skills-kit --skill code-refactoring-tech-debtgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bcastelino/agent-skills-kitWrote 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/bcastelino/agent-skills-kit/code-refactoring-tech-debt)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bcastelino/agent-skills-kit/code-refactoring-tech-debt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcastelino/agent-skills-kit/code-refactoring-tech-debt/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/bcastelino/agent-skills-kit/code-refactoring-tech-debt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcastelino/agent-skills-kit/code-refactoring-tech-debt.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 | $0.00039 | $0.02486 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00994 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00497 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00249 |
Grade A, and why
code-refactoring-tech-debt 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to code-refactoring-tech-debt — 7 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 388 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Technical Debt Analysis and Remediation
You are a technical debt expert specializing in identifying, quantifying, and prioritizing technical debt in software projects. Analyze the codebase to uncover debt, assess its impact, and create actionable remediation plans.
Use this skill when
- Quantifying and prioritizing technical debt
- Planning incremental refactoring with measurable ROI
- Building a remediation roadmap for legacy or high-risk code
Do not use this skill when
- The task is unrelated to technical debt analysis and remediation
- You need a different domain or tool outside this scope
Context
The user needs a comprehensive technical debt analysis to understand what's slowing down development, increasing bugs, and creating maintenance challenges. Focus on practical, measurable improvements with clear ROI.
Requirements
$ARGUMENTS
Instructions
1. Technical Debt Inventory
Conduct a thorough scan for all types of technical debt:
Code Debt
-
Duplicated Code
- Exact duplicates (copy-paste)
- Similar logic patterns
- Repeated business rules
- Quantify: Lines duplicated, locations
-
Complex Code
- High cyclomatic complexity (>10)
- Deeply nested conditionals (>3 levels)
- Long methods (>50 lines)
- God classes (>500 lines, >20 methods)
- Quantify: Complexity scores, hotspots
-
Poor Structure
- Circular dependencies
- Inappropriate intimacy between classes
- Feature envy (methods using other class data)
- Shotgun surgery patterns
- Quantify: Coupling metrics, change frequency
Architecture Debt
-
Design Flaws
- Missing abstractions
- Leaky abstractions
- Violated architectural boundaries
- Monolithic components
- Quantify: Component size, dependency violations
-
Technology Debt
- Outdated frameworks/libraries
- Deprecated API usage
- Legacy patterns (e.g., callbacks vs promises)
- Unsupported dependencies
- Quantify: Version lag, security vulnerabilities
Testing Debt
- Coverage Gaps
- Untested code paths
- Missing edge cases
- No integration tests
- Lack of performance tests
- Quantify: Coverage %, critical paths untested
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 · 388 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 05b911841106
code-refactoring-tech-debt is a skill published in the GitHub repository bcastelino/agent-skills-kit (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 2,486 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to code-refactoring-tech-debt, differing in 7 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
reviewer
Get a second-opinion review from Google's Antigravity CLI (agy staffer, fast Gemini) - of code (a diff, PR, working tree) or of a decision, plan, or design. Use when the user says /agy:reviewer, "have agy review this", "second opinion on my diff/PR/plan", or after finishing work and wanting an independent verifier…
graph-it-live
Analyze code dependencies, call graphs, and architecture using the graph-it CLI. Use this skill whenever the user wants to understand how their code is connected — even if they don't say "dependency graph" explicitly. Trigger for: "what calls this function", "who uses this class", "is it safe to delete X", "what…
pr-review
Review pull requests and Git diffs with Graph-It-Live risk, breaking-change, dependency-impact, cycle, unused-export, and test-candidate evidence. Use when asked to review a PR, inspect a diff, assess merge risk, check a branch before merging, create a Graph-It-Live review gate, or explain review-pr results. Trigger…
codex
Route a task to OpenAI's Codex CLI (codex exec) instead of doing it yourself. Use this skill ANY time the user names codex or types /codex — even for routine work Claude could handle, because the user is choosing to delegate. The intent: 'ask codex', 'have codex review/refactor this', 'check/validate with codex', 'see…
agy
Route a task to Google Antigravity's agy CLI — the multi-model successor to gemini-cli. Use this skill ANY time the user names agy, antigravity, OR gemini, or types /agy or /gemini — even for routine work. Runs multiple models (Gemini 3.x, Claude 4.6, GPT-OSS): 'gemini' picks a Gemini model, 'agy'/'antigravity' the…
agy-reviewer
Get a second-opinion review from Google's Antigravity CLI (agy staffer, fast Gemini) - of code (a diff, PR, working tree) or of a decision, plan, or design. Use when the user says /agy-reviewer, "have agy review this", "second opinion on my diff/PR/plan", or after finishing work and wanting an independent verifier…