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 boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit --skill architecture-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amritWrote 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/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/architecture-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/architecture-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/architecture-audit/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/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/architecture-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/architecture-audit.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 | $0.00043 | $0.02150 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01075 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00430 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00215 |
Grade A, and why
architecture-audit 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 — 258 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Architecture Audit
Overview
Evaluate the structural health of a codebase — patterns, coupling, cohesion, and alignment between what the code claims to be and what it actually is.
Core principle: Architecture is not what's drawn on a whiteboard. It's what's in the code.
The Iron Law
NO ARCHITECTURAL CLAIMS WITHOUT READING THE ACTUAL CODE
When to Use
- "Audit this codebase"
- "Is this well-architected?"
- "What's the technical debt situation?"
- System feels hard to change or understand
- New team member needs to understand the system
- Before a major refactoring or migration
When NOT to Use
- First encounter with a codebase (use
codebase-mappingfirst) - Debugging a specific bug (use
systematic-debugging) - Performance bottleneck investigation only (use
performance-audit) - Need to understand what the codebase does (use
codebase-mapping)
Anti-Shortcut Rules
YOU CANNOT:
- Assess architecture from directory names alone — read the actual code in each layer
- Claim "clean architecture" because folders are named well — check dependency direction
- Say "patterns are consistent" without checking EVERY module — inconsistency hides in corners
- Skip dependency graph analysis — coupling only reveals itself through imports
- Accept "it works" as architectural validation — working ≠ well-architected
- Audit only the happy path — error handling architecture matters equally
- Skip cross-cutting concerns — auth, logging, config are architecture too
- Trust documentation over code — code is the source of truth, docs drift
Common Rationalizations (Don't Accept These)
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "The folder structure looks clean" | Folder structure ≠ architecture. Check dependency direction. |
| "We're using MVC/Clean Architecture" | Claiming a pattern ≠ implementing it. Verify with imports. |
| "Only the core modules matter" | Utility modules, middleware, and config can rot the architecture. |
| "It's a small project, architecture doesn't matter" | Small projects become large projects. Foundation matters. |
| "We'll fix the architecture later" | Later never comes. Architectural debt compounds exponentially. |
| "The tests prove the architecture is fine" | Tests can pass in a poorly architected system. |
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 · 258 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 2e26a693307f
architecture-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 2,150 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…