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 agentmods add skills/bengous/claude-code-plugins/clean-commentsnpx skills add bengous/claude-code-plugins --skill clean-commentsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bengous/claude-code-pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00108 | $0.03126 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00054 | $0.01563 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00625 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00313 |
Grade A, and why
clean-comments 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 yesterday.
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 — 281 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Clean Comments
The cheap one is noise: a comment that restates the line below it. It wastes a reader's second, nothing more.
The expensive one is a comment that LIES: a path that moved, a count that grew, a "TEMPORARY" that shipped, a "stubbed" the code refutes. It sends the next reader — human or agent — toward a wrong decision. On a real audit it outnumbered pure paraphrase in cost by a wide margin, and no grid that only asks "does this restate the code?" ever catches it.
So this skill judges truth as well as usefulness, and it protects the comments that carry a why or a constraint — those are an asset, not debt.
Budget (non-negotiable)
- Size batches by content volume, not file count: target ~200k tokens of file content per hunter (bytes / 4), never more than ~300k — past that the context is too full and error rates climb.
- Hunter count = ceil(total volume / 200k). Most repos need 1 to 3 hunters.
- At most 4 hunters run concurrently.
- If the estimate exceeds 4 hunters (~1M tokens in scope): STOP. Show the file count,
the estimated volume, the comment-line total (probe
--count), and the hunter count. Launch nothing before the user explicitly confirms. After confirmation, run waves of 4, total announced up front. - A hunter NEVER spawns a subagent, and never invokes
claudethrough Bash. No exception, including "just to verify". - These values are defaults: the user can override them in the prompt, or a repo can override the hunter (see Extension points).
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- yesterday First seen · 281 lines · 108 tokens per session scan A 7ccf0641e975
clean-comments is a skill published in the GitHub repository bengous/claude-code-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 3,126 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
sql-reporting
Conventions and review steps for writing analytics SQL against the warehouse. Use whenever the task involves querying tables, building a report, or aggregating metrics.
html-ppt-hermes-cyber-terminal
OpenDesign + BYOK: choosing and wiring your own model, hands-on — cost, quality, and the routing decision. Built as a decision-grade AI literacy deck for engineers, IT, applied-AI teams.
verify-security
安全校验关卡。自动扫描代码安全漏洞，检测危险模式，确保安全决策有文档记录。当用户提到安全扫描、漏洞检测、安全审计、代码安全、OWASP、注入检测、敏感信息泄露时使用。在新建模块、安全相关变更、攻防任务、重构完成时自动触发。.
development
开发语言能力索引。Python、Go、Rust、TypeScript、Java、C++、Shell。当用户提到编程、开发、代码、语言时路由到此。.
post-build-flow
Handles workflow verification and setup after build-workflow succeeds, or when the message contains workflow-verification-follow-up or workflow-setup-required. Load after direct builds, when verificationReadiness requires action, or on orchestrator verify/setup follow-up turns.
n8n:human-like-code-review
Reviews a GitHub pull request like a thoughtful human reviewer and writes the feedback to a markdown file. Prioritizes context, architecture fit, solution complexity, bugs, security edge cases, and missing tests. Use when given a PR URL to review, or when the user says /human-like-code-review.