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 ckorhonen/hone-skills --skill intent-clarity-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ckorhonen/hone-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/ckorhonen/hone-skills/intent-clarity-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ckorhonen/hone-skills/intent-clarity-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ckorhonen/hone-skills/intent-clarity-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/ckorhonen/hone-skills/intent-clarity-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ckorhonen/hone-skills/intent-clarity-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 | $0.00069 | $0.01588 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00794 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00318 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
hone:intent-clarity-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 12d 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 — 160 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Intent Clarity Audit
What This Skill Does
Audits source code for patterns that make it harder to understand what the code is doing and why. Focuses on five categories of intent obscurity:
- Unclear names: Single-letter variables outside tiny loops, generic names
(
data,temp,result,val,info,item) in non-trivial scopes, abbreviated names that sacrifice readability. - Nested ternaries: Ternary or conditional expressions nested two or more levels deep.
- Unnamed boolean parameters: Function calls passing bare
true/falseliterals without a named parameter, comment, or object wrapper to explain the meaning. - Overly clever one-liners: Dense expressions that chain multiple operations, bitwise tricks used for non-bitwise purposes, regex used inline without explanation, or reduce/fold with complex accumulators.
- Restating comments: Comments that describe what the next line does rather
than why (e.g.,
// increment counterbeforecounter++).
Reports findings with file:line, the offending snippet, the category, and a brief explanation of why it harms clarity.
When To Use
- On a weekly schedule to audit recently changed files.
- After a large feature branch merges.
- When reviewing code written by unfamiliar contributors.
- When the user asks to "find unclear code" or "audit code clarity".
Do Not Use
- For method length — use
hone:method-brevity-auditinstead. - For duplicated code — use
hone:duplication-huntinstead. - For test naming — use
hone:test-naming-auditinstead. - For naming specificity (Manager, Handler, Utils) — use
hone:naming-specificity-auditinstead. - To rewrite code. This skill reports findings only.
Inputs To Confirm
- Scope: Which directories or file patterns to scan (default: files changed in the last 14 days per git log, falling back to entire repo if no git history).
- Recency window: Number of days to look back for changed files (default: 14).
- Categories: Which of the five categories to check (default: all).
- Exclusions: Glob patterns for files or directories to skip.
- Top-N: Maximum findings to report (default: 25).
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 160 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A 208ac6af9079
hone:intent-clarity-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository ckorhonen/hone-skills (0 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 1,588 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
review-pr
Multi-agent PR review with four modes (review, re-review, self-review, address-feedback) - spawns parallel subagents, saves diff to /tmp for context efficiency, supports file exclusion patterns.
Biome
Biome 2.x — fast all-in-one web toolchain in Rust. Formats, lints, assists. Replaces Prettier + ESLint.
biome
Biome - Fast all-in-one toolchain for web projects (linter + formatter in Rust, 100x faster than ESLint).
vibe-check
Audit code for "vibe coding sins" — patterns that indicate AI-generated code was accepted without proper review. Produces a scored report card with fix suggestions.
ruff-docs
Ruff — fast Python linter and formatter in Rust. 900+ rules, Black-compatible formatter, LSP, CI/CD.
recipe-front-review
Reviews completed frontend implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality, and security, then applies user-approved React corrections.