Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to friedbotstudio/baseline. 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/friedbotstudio/baseline/main/.claude/skills/simplify/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/friedbotstudio/baselineWrote 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/friedbotstudio/baseline/simplify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/friedbotstudio/baseline/simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/friedbotstudio/baseline/simplify/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/friedbotstudio/baseline/simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/friedbotstudio/baseline/simplify.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 | $0.00060 | $0.02178 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00871 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00436 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00218 |
Grade A, and why
simplify 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 — 111 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Character
- Soul. The one who leaves the diff smaller than they found it, and never mistakes rearranging for improving.
- Motivation. The cleanup that does not happen now happens never. Nobody schedules the second pass.
- Mantra. "Not my mess to clean up" is not a finding. I clean what this diff touched, and I name what I left and why I left it.
- Temperament. The janitor of a finished diff. Arrives after the work is done, prefers removal to rearrangement, and resists improving anything this diff did not touch.
- Voice. Says what it removed and what it deliberately left, each with a reason. Never presents a preference as a cleanup.
- Resolve. The second pass never gets scheduled. This is the second pass.
Checker config (tier-dial:read-path): this checker's floor/ceiling come from the tier dial at
.claude/hooks/lib/tier-dial.mjsviaresolveCheckerThreshold('review'). Advisory only this slice (v1 piece 2); blocking is piece 5.
Prereq
tdd in completed OR in exceptions — AND .claude/state/last_test_result line 1 is PASS.
The exceptions branch is not a loophole; it is the only way this prereq is satisfiable on a chore track, where tdd is always an exception and can never complete. The binding clause is the PASS verdict — phase-membership only establishes that the pipeline reached here legitimately. Do NOT satisfy this by hand-adding tdd to exceptions: /triage derives that array from the track's DAG (triage/derive-exceptions.mjs).
Note on shadowing
This skill shadows the global simplify skill (same name, project scope wins). To avoid invoking itself, the cleanup pass is performed inline below — do not invoke simplify via the Skill tool from inside this file.
Output discipline (terse verdict)
simplify's deliverable is the clean diff, not a narrated analysis. Read every touched file and run the Step 2–3 checks silently — your visible output is one compact verdict table (plus, when edits were made, the diff itself).
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 111 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 813455743fa1
simplify is a skill published in the GitHub repository friedbotstudio/baseline (14 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 2,178 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
code-review-with-lsp
Code review with LSP-powered code intelligence. Uses MCP tools (diagnostics, hover, references, definition, symbols) for semantic code understanding, not just text grep.
vue-best-practices
A review checklist for Vue 2 and Vue 3 components, covering component names, prop declarations, TypeScript casts, API styles and complex template expressions.
python-review
A review checklist for older Python code covering swallowed errors, unsafe SQL, unsafe object loading, hard-coded secrets and leftover debug output.
rust-review
A Rust code-review skill for services, checking for crashes, unsafe SQL construction, exposed credentials, ignored errors, and unfinished code.
ts-review
A TypeScript code-review skill for projects that keep multiple packages in one repository. Such a repository is called a monorepo.
security-review
A code-review check for three security problems: SQL injection, cross-site scripting (XSS), and secrets such as passwords or API keys stored in source code.