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 cafe3310/public-agent-skills --skill code-naming-auditorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cafe3310/public-agent-skillsWrote 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/cafe3310/public-agent-skills/code-naming-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cafe3310/public-agent-skills/code-naming-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cafe3310/public-agent-skills/code-naming-auditor/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/cafe3310/public-agent-skills/code-naming-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cafe3310/public-agent-skills/code-naming-auditor.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 | $0.00024 | $0.01058 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00529 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00212 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
code-naming-auditor 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.
What it actually says
代码命名审计 Skill (Code Naming Auditor)
本 Skill 指导一个 AI Agent 对代码库执行全面的审计,以确保其遵循一套明确定义的术语和命名规范。其核心目标是在整个项目中强制执行“通用语言”(Ubiquitous Language),从而提高代码的清晰度、一致性和可维护性。
在使用本 Skill 期间,Agent 的输出避免 Markdown Table 格式。使用无格式文本列表即可。
工作流 (Workflow)
审计过程遵循一个结构化的、分步骤的工作流。
第一步:建立术语表 (Establish the Glossary)
清晰、明确的术语表是所有代码审计工作的基础。
- 检查现有术语表: 首先,在项目中搜索一个已存在的术语文档。在
docs/或根目录中寻找名为glossary.md、terminology.md或类似的文件。 - 与用户确认: 如果找到了文档,需向用户展示并确认它是否是本次审计工作的“事实之源”(source of truth)。
- 创建新术语表: 如果项目中不存在术语表,应告知用户其重要性。使用位于
references/glossary_template.md的模板来引导用户创建一个。术语表应精确定义项目核心的 名词 (Nouns) (例如Content,Section,Line) 和 动词 (Verbs) (例如get,find,search,list) 的语义。定义术语表的时候,要考虑使用精确、足够特殊的命名;避免模糊或歧义的术语。
在拥有一个清晰且双方同意的术语表之前,不应继续下一步。
第二步:定义审计范围 (Define the Audit Scope)
- 询问用户: 提示用户指定他们希望审计的目录或文件。
- 确认范围: 在继续之前,与用户确认范围。例如:“我将审计
src/basics/目录下的所有文件。这样对吗?”
第三步:分析与报告 (Analyze and Report)
这是核心执行阶段。系统地分析在已定义范围内的每一个文件。
- 读取文件: 一次读取一个文件内容。
- 分析命名: 仔细检查文件中的编程命名:
- 方法 / 函数名
- 参数名
- 变量名
- 类型名 / 别名
- 对照术语表: 将每一个命名与术语表中的规则和定义进行比较。尤其要注意:
- 动词错用: 函数名是否在应该使用
search的地方误用了find? - 名词不一致: 一个代表文件多行内容的
string[]是否被命名为lines而不是术语表中定义的Content? - 模糊性/歧义: 是否存在像
data,item,val,str这样的模糊命名?在这些地方,是否可以使用术语表中更精确的术语?
- 动词错用: 函数名是否在应该使用
- 汇总偏差: 为当前文件创建一个清单,列出所有已识别的命名偏差。对于每一项偏差,记录其位置(例如,方法名、参数名)、问题描述,以及根据术语表得出的明确修改建议。
- 重复: 对范围内的所有文件重复此过程。
- 提交报告: 分析完成后,以清晰、结构化的格式(例如,按文件分组的列表)向用户呈现汇总后的偏差与建议清单。
第四步:实施重构 (Refactor - 可选)
在提交报告后,Agent 可以主动提出应用这些修改建议。
- 提议重构: 询问用户:“您希望我将这些命名修正应用到代码库中吗?”
- 应用修改: 如果用户同意,使用
replace工具系统地应用每一个修改建议。为确保准确性,应逐一或按小的逻辑批次执行这些变更。 - 验证: 重构完成后,最好能运行项目的测试套件,以确保这些变更没有引入任何回归问题。
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 60 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 0349b7305df7
code-naming-auditor is a skill published in the GitHub repository cafe3310/public-agent-skills (253 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,058 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
gitlab-create-mr
Create GitLab merge requests from a local branch using a reviewable workflow for branch checks, GitLab host detection, diff analysis, title and description writing, and glab mr create. Use when opening a GitLab merge request, drafting or improving merge request copy, preparing a branch for review, or working across…
gitlab-mr-inline-comment
Publish a single inline comment on a GitLab merge request by anchoring it to a valid diff line with glab api. Use when Codex needs to place one review comment on a specific MR file and line, while reusing the user's existing glab authentication and stopping on invalid anchors instead of falling back to a general…
otel-go-reviewer
Review pull requests, diffs, patches, or design proposals for the open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go repository with a senior maintainer mindset. Use when changes in opentelemetry-go may affect OpenTelemetry specification compliance, repository contribution rules, changelog requirements, module versioning boundaries, API…
code-review
Request or perform a git-backed code review for a defined diff or SHA range using implementation context and requirements. Use when finishing a task, completing a major feature, preparing to merge, or when you need a fresh review before proceeding.
opentelemetry-go-reviewer
High-bar review for changes in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go with strict standards for correctness, compatibility, and performance.
code-review-and-quality
Use when reviewing Android code (own or others'). Five-axis review framework: Correctness, Readability, Architecture, Security, Performance. Categorized findings with Kotlin/Compose-specific checks.