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 esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill --skill rubycritic-skillgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skillWrote 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/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill/rubycritic-skill)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill/rubycritic-skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill/rubycritic-skill/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/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill/rubycritic-skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill/rubycritic-skill.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 | $0.00068 | $0.01737 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00695 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00347 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00174 |
Grade A, and why
RubyCritic Code Quality Analysis 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 1mo 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 — 264 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
RubyCritic Code Quality Analysis Skill
A Claude Code skill for analyzing Ruby and Rails code quality using RubyCritic.
Description
This skill integrates RubyCritic to provide comprehensive code quality analysis for Ruby and Rails projects. It helps identify code smells, complexity issues, and areas for refactoring with detailed metrics and actionable insights.
Commands
/rubycritic [path]
Analyze code quality for the specified path or entire project.
Options:
path(optional): Specific file or directory to analyze. Defaults to current directory.
Examples:
/rubycritic
/rubycritic app/models
/rubycritic app/controllers/users_controller.rb
/rubycritic-summary
Get a quick summary of code quality metrics without detailed file breakdowns.
/rubycritic-worst
Show only the worst-rated files that need immediate attention.
Options:
--limit N: Number of worst files to show (default: 10)
Examples:
/rubycritic-worst
/rubycritic-worst --limit 5
/rubycritic-compare [branch]
Compare code quality between current branch and specified branch.
Options:
branch: Branch to compare against (default: main/master)
Examples:
/rubycritic-compare main
/rubycritic-compare develop
Usage Guidelines
When to Use This Skill
- Before Code Reviews: Run analysis on changed files to catch issues early
- After Refactoring: Verify improvements in code quality metrics
- Regular Health Checks: Weekly or sprint-based quality assessments
- Legacy Code: Identify technical debt and prioritize refactoring efforts
- Onboarding: Help new developers understand code quality standards
Interpretation of Results
Score Ranges:
- A (90-100): Excellent - minimal issues
- B (80-89): Good - minor improvements needed
- C (70-79): Fair - consider refactoring
- D (60-69): Poor - refactoring recommended
- F (<60): Critical - immediate attention required
Key Metrics:
- Churn: How frequently files change (high churn + low quality = priority)
- Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity (aim for < 10 per method)
- Duplication: Code duplication percentage (aim for < 5%)
- Smells: Code smell count by type (Long Method, Feature Envy, etc.)
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 264 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A e0430028ec6b
RubyCritic Code Quality Analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository esparkman/claude-rubycritic-skill (18 stars, last pushed 11mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 1,737 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
aposd-audit
Quantitative design audit. Counts pass-throughs, duplication, doc gaps, naming issues, and exceptions across 5 dimensions, scored 0-4.
code-refactoring-advisor
Enterprise code refactoring advisor that detects code smells, anti-patterns, and complexity issues with specific refactoring recommendations, test generation, and maintainability metrics.
software-code-refactoring
Improve production code quality while preserving all existing test behavior. Commonly used for the Refactor phase of TDD red-green-refactor, but applicable to any codebase with tests. Use when production code works but needs cleanup — reducing duplication, improving naming, simplifying complexity, aligning with…
improve-codebase-architecture
Review module boundaries, interface depth and high-leverage refactors with evidence.
refactoring-workflow
Improve the structure of existing code without changing its behaviour, in small verified steps under a green test suite. Use when the user asks to refactor, clean up, restructure or simplify code, wants to reduce duplication or coupling, is preparing a codebase for a feature it cannot currently accommodate, or when…
techdebt
Find and fix technical debt including duplicated code, dead code, outdated patterns, and code smells. Run at the end of sessions to clean up.