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 definite-d/agent-skills --skill lean-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/definite-d/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/definite-d/agent-skills/lean-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/definite-d/agent-skills/lean-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/definite-d/agent-skills/lean-code/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/definite-d/agent-skills/lean-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/definite-d/agent-skills/lean-code.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 | $0.00015 | $0.01998 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00799 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00400 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00200 |
Grade A, and why
lean-code 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 2mo 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 — 109 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Lean Code
Coding agents (including you) are trained to be thorough, careful, and to show their work. Those instincts make for good conversations but bad codebases: they produce code that's padded with speculative flexibility, defensive checks against impossible failures, comments that talk to the user instead of documenting the code, and tests that exist to look complete rather than to catch real bugs. None of that padding is free; every extra branch, guard, and file is something a human now has to read, maintain, and trust.
This skill has two modes:
- Self-check: run silently before you consider any code-writing or code-editing task finished.
- Audit: run explicitly when asked to review, clean up, simplify, or find "AI slop" in existing code (yours or someone else's).
In both modes, the underlying test for every line is the same: would this line survive being questioned by a terse senior engineer who has to maintain it? If you can't articulate a concrete reason it's needed right now, for this requirement, it's a candidate for deletion. It's always cheaper to add code later when a real need shows up than to carry speculative code today.
The four core patterns
1. Over-engineering / premature abstraction
Why it happens: it feels responsible to anticipate future needs, and abstraction feels like "good engineering."
Signals:
- An interface, abstract base class, or plugin/strategy pattern with exactly one real implementation
- Config options, feature flags, or parameters that nothing in the codebase actually varies
- A generic/configurable solution built for what is actually a one-off script or single call site
- Extensibility hooks, registries, or "for future use" arguments nobody asked for
- A factory or builder for two concrete cases
Fix: solve the problem that's actually in front of you, as directly as possible. Add a seam only when a second concrete need for it actually appears, not when you can imagine one. Match the code's complexity to the problem's real complexity, not its imagined future complexity.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 109 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 3168742fb695
lean-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository definite-d/agent-skills (2 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,998 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
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…
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…