Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to dirien/yet-another-agent-harness. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/main/.claude/skills/design-principles/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dirien/yet-another-agent-harnessWrote 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/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/design-principles)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/design-principles"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/design-principles.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00118 | $0.01626 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00059 | $0.00813 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00325 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00163 |
Grade A, and why
design-principles 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 8d 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 — 192 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Principles Audit
Audit the codebase against well-known design principles. Produce a scored DESIGN_AUDIT.md with prioritized remediation actions.
Core principle: Investigate, do not pattern-match. Read the actual code to determine whether a violation is genuine, intentional, or a false positive. Only flag findings with specific file:line evidence.
Prerequisite check
git --version 2>/dev/null && git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null
If not in a git repository, warn but proceed — git history will be unavailable but file analysis still works.
Step 1: Detect context
Determine language, framework, and paradigm — this governs which principles apply and how violations manifest:
ls go.mod package.json pyproject.toml Cargo.toml *.csproj 2>/dev/null
Read README.md and CONTEXT.md (if present) for architectural intent.
Determine audit scope from input:
- Full audit (default) — entire codebase, excluding
vendor/,node_modules/, generated files - Module audit — specific directory or package
- Delegated mode — called by tech-debt; focus on changed files and surface findings for the scorecard
For language-specific violation patterns per principle, see
references/principles-guide.md.
Step 2: Scan for violations
For each applicable principle, read actual code and identify violations. Do not grep for keywords — trace call paths and responsibilities.
SOLID
- S — Single Responsibility: Find files/classes/functions with multiple distinct reasons to change. Signals: files > 300 lines mixing concerns, functions doing I/O + business logic + formatting.
- O — Open/Closed: Find code that requires modification (not
extension) to add new behavior. Signals: long
switch/if-elsechains on type tags, no interface/abstraction at extension points. - L — Liskov Substitution: Find subtypes that weaken preconditions, strengthen postconditions, or throw unexpected errors. Signals: overrides that do nothing, panic on valid input, type assertions before use.
- I — Interface Segregation: Find broad interfaces forcing implementors to satisfy methods they do not use. Signals: interface with > 5 methods, stub/no-op implementations.
- D — Dependency Inversion: Find high-level modules importing concrete low-level types. Signals: direct instantiation of dependencies, no interfaces at package boundaries, untestable code.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 8d ago First seen · 192 lines · 118 tokens per session scan A 81bcfc637dae
design-principles is a skill published in the GitHub repository dirien/yet-another-agent-harness (20 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 118 tokens to every session and 1,626 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
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.
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…