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/docs-plus/docs.plus/request-refactor-plannpx skills add docs-plus/docs.plus --skill request-refactor-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docs-plus/docs.plusWhat 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 | $0.00053 | $0.00555 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00278 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00111 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
request-refactor-plan 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to request-refactor-plan — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
This skill will be invoked when the user wants to create a refactor request. You should go through the steps below. You may skip steps if you don't consider them necessary.
-
Ask the user for a long, detailed description of the problem they want to solve and any potential ideas for solutions.
-
Explore the repo to verify their assertions and understand the current state of the codebase.
-
Ask whether they have considered other options, and present other options to them.
-
Interview the user about the implementation. Be extremely detailed and thorough.
-
Hammer out the exact scope of the implementation. Work out what you plan to change and what you plan not to change.
-
Look in the codebase to check for test coverage of this area of the codebase. If there is insufficient test coverage, ask the user what their plans for testing are.
-
Break the implementation into a plan of tiny commits. Remember Martin Fowler's advice to "make each refactoring step as small as possible, so that you can always see the program working."
-
Create a GitHub issue with the refactor plan. Use the following template for the issue description:
Problem Statement
The problem that the developer is facing, from the developer's perspective.
Solution
The solution to the problem, from the developer's perspective.
Commits
A LONG, detailed implementation plan. Write the plan in plain English, breaking down the implementation into the tiniest commits possible. Each commit should leave the codebase in a working state.
Decision Document
A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
- The modules that will be built/modified
- The interfaces of those modules that will be modified
- Technical clarifications from the developer
- Architectural decisions
- Schema changes
- API contracts
- Specific interactions
Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
Testing Decisions
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 · 69 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A d59de4ba6cc1
request-refactor-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository docs-plus/docs.plus (88 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 555 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to request-refactor-plan, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
docx
Read, create, and convert Microsoft Word (.docx) documents — extract text and tables, build reports from markdown/JSON, and export to PDF.
document-converter
Convert Office documents (PPTX, DOCX, XLSX, PDF, HTML, CSV, JSON, XML, images) to Markdown using Microsoft MarkItDown. Provides the agent with conversion strategies for academic and research workflows.
docx-manipulation
Create, edit, and manipulate Word documents programmatically using python-docx.
add-format
End-to-end checklist for adding a new input or output format to AILANG Parse (docparse). Use when the user says 'add support for X format', 'wire up a new parser', 'add .foo format', 'add a parser for .bar', 'support .baz files', 'ship format X', 'can we parse .qux', 'new format rollout', or mentions a file extension…
landing-page
Create a new AILANG Parse documentation/landing page targeting a specific keyword or topic. Use when user says 'new landing page', 'new page for X', 'create a page about X', 'landing page for keyword X', or wants to add a documentation page to the docs/ site. Also use when the user references long-tail keywords, SEO…
benchmark
Run OfficeDocBench evaluation and refresh benchmark scores across the AILANG Parse website. Use when the user says 'run benchmarks', 'rerun the benchmark', 'refresh benchmark numbers', 'update bench scores', 'regenerate summary.json', mentions OfficeDocBench, asks to evaluate parsers, asks why scores are out of sync…