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/boshu2/agentops/refactornpx skills add boshu2/agentops --skill refactorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boshu2/agentopsWhat 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 | $0.00029 | $0.00748 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00374 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 2d 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 — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor — one structural experiment
Refactor changes structure while preserving observable behavior. It performs one caller-selected transformation and reports the result.
Procedure
- Name the preserved behavior and the focused acceptance surface.
- Record an honest baseline, including any reproducible ambient failures.
- Apply one bounded transformation: extract, rename, inline, simplify, encapsulate, move, or delete dead code.
- Run the focused check and the smallest package-level regression check justified by the changed surface.
- Return the diff summary, commands, results, and behavior not checked.
Do not combine a newly discovered behavior fix with the structural change. A red result is evidence for the caller; this skill does not revert, narrow, retry, commit, validate, or route subsequent work automatically.
Seam experiments before commitment
When the transformation needs a seam — an extraction boundary, interface, or module split — and more than one candidate seam exists, probe before you cut. Run the probe in disposable isolation (a scratch branch, worktree, or copied tree the caller's policy allows): rough in the seam, see what it forces — signature churn, import cycles, test rewrites — then discard the probe and keep only the knowledge. Stop condition: at most two probes; if the second candidate seam also fights back, report both findings to the caller instead of trying a third. Cutting the first imaginable seam directly into the working tree is the premature seam failure mode: the wrong boundary calcifies because reverting it now costs more than living with it.
Neutrality gates
"Behavior-preserving" is a claim to execute, not assert. Gate the transformation on behavior-identical proof:
- The focused check and the package-level regression check pass both before and after, with the same set of pre-existing failures — no new red, and no quietly vanished red either (a test that stops running is a behavior change).
- For output-producing surfaces (generators, serializers, formatters, reports), hash the outputs: capture golden-output hashes over identical inputs before the change and compare byte-for-byte after. A hash mismatch is a behavior diff to surface and explain, never to shrug at; the caller decides whether to keep, narrow, or reverse the change.
- Observable error messages, exit codes, and public signatures on the changed surface are part of behavior unless the caller excluded them.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 87 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 30c934734b38
refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository boshu2/agentops (431 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 748 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
brainstorm
Explore vague or ambitious ideas into a right-sized requirements-only plan. Use when the user wants to brainstorm, think through scope, decide what to build, or needs collaborative product framing before planning, not for a decisive verdict on whether to adopt or switch to a specific external technology, library, or…
doc-review
Use when the user asks to review or critique a prose planning document — a plan, spec, PRD, requirements doc, or design doc.
audit-project
Run an iterative multi-agent code audit until critical and high findings are resolved. Use when the user says "audit my code", "find all the bugs", "deep code audit", "iterative review", or "review until clean".
autolearn
Compound a solved problem into a durable in-repo learning doc. Use when a verified non-trivial fix lands, the user says "compound this", "document this fix", or "remember this". This is the automatic-capture entry point; for an explicitly requested one-off write-up, use compound.
doubt-driven
Doubt-driven adversarial review. Use when correctness matters more than speed, the code is unfamiliar, stakes are high, a claim can't be checked by the type system or compiler, or verifying now is cheaper than debugging later.
drift-detect
Use when the user says "plan drift", asks whether the roadmap, plans, or docs still match the code, or is deciding what to rebuild when restarting a stalled project. For doc-vs-code drift inside a specific diff, use sync-docs.