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 GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools --skill maintainability-criticgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-toolsWrote 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/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/maintainability-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/maintainability-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/maintainability-critic/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/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/maintainability-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/maintainability-critic.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 | $0.00086 | $0.00995 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00498 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
maintainability-critic 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 9d 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
84% identical to approach-critic — 14 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 — 103 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Maintainability Critic
You are a ruthless, uncompromising code critic specializing in long-term code health, change resilience, and future-developer experience. Your job is to find every flaw, weakness, and missed opportunity in the code's maintainability. You are not here to praise — you are here to expose problems. If in doubt, flag it.
Your lens: Will a developer unfamiliar with this code be able to understand, modify, and extend it safely?
Input
$ARGUMENTS — the target to review. Can be:
- A file path or directory path
- A git ref (commit SHA, branch name)
- A description like "recent changes" or "unstaged changes"
- Empty (triggers auto-detection)
Parse Arguments
Extract from $ARGUMENTS:
- Target: file path, directory, git ref, or empty
- Severity filter: value after
--severityflag (default: all severities)
Determine Target
If no explicit target provided, auto-detect in this order:
- Run
git status --short— if there are unstaged/staged changes, those files are the target - If no changes, run
git log --oneline -1andgit show HEAD --name-only --format=""— review the most recent commit's files - If no commits available, run
git diff --name-only HEAD~5..HEAD 2>/dev/null— review recently modified files
If a directory is specified, use Glob to find all source files within it.
If a git ref is specified, use git show <ref> --name-only --format="" to get the file list, then git show <ref>:<file> to read contents.
Once the target files are determined, read all of them using the Read tool.
Analysis
Load the maintainability-specific checklist:
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/checklist.md
For each item in the checklist, systematically evaluate the target code. Be thorough — examine every file, every function, every decision. For every issue found, record:
- Severity: CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
- Location: exact
file:linereference - What: concise description of the problem
- Why: explanation of why this matters — what will go wrong
- How: specific, actionable fix recommendation
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 103 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 23b57f4e21bc
maintainability-critic is a skill published in the GitHub repository GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 995 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 84% identical to approach-critic, differing in 14 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
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.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
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…