polish

A review-and-revision workflow for improving an artifact such as prose, a specification, a prompt, or code. It has separate agents evaluate the work and produce focused revisions against fixed criteria.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to refine an artifact through evaluator and revision rounds until it meets the criteria or reaches the allowed iteration limit.
Why use it?
It provides structured feedback without letting the writer simply approve its own earlier work, and it limits revisions to identified gaps.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Part of the agent-workflow-amplifiers plugin — 25 skills, 2 commands, 2 agents shipped together

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/griffinwork40/agent-framework/polish
Any agent
npx skills add griffinwork40/agent-framework --skill polish
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/griffinwork40/agent-framework

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install agent-workflow-amplifiers, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 25 skills, 2 commands, 2 agents.

Per session 82 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,204 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 100% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00082 $0.01204
Opus 5 $0.00041 $0.00602
Sonnet 5 $0.00016 $0.00241
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00120

Measured 3d ago against content hash 03c7d8d1f593, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

polish 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 3d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

100% identical to polish — 0 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.

skills/polish/SKILL.md · 140 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Sub-agent contract

/contract

polish is a three-wave evaluator-optimizer loop that applies to any artifact at any workflow stage. Wave 1 locks concrete, testable criteria. Waves 2 and 3 alternate (evaluator → generator) until all criteria pass or the iteration cap is reached. The evaluator is always spawned stateless — it never sees prior generation history — eliminating the sycophancy failure mode that plagues shared-context review loops.

The orchestrator coordinates but never edits the artifact directly. All revisions are produced by the Wave 3 generator, which receives only the blocking_gaps list from the evaluator (not its full reasoning). This constraint prevents scope-creep revisions and keeps each iteration focused on the delta between current state and the locked criteria.

On cap exhaust the orchestrator emits the best-scoring version plus a structured remaining_gaps report so the caller can decide whether to extend the cap, escalate to a human, or ship with known gaps documented.


Inputs

Field Required Description
artifact yes The text, spec, prompt, design doc, or code snippet to refine
goal yes Natural-language quality intent ("make this safe for external stakeholders")
criteria no Pre-supplied testable criteria — skips Wave 1 extraction if provided
threshold no pass_all (default) or pass_N where N is an integer
cap no Max refinement iterations (default: 4, max: 8)

Wave 1 — Criteria Extraction

Trigger: Always, unless criteria were supplied by the caller.

Agent: Single subagent. Reads artifact + goal. Produces:

{
  "criteria": [
    { "id": "C1", "text": "<concrete, binary-testable criterion>" },
    ...
  ],
  "threshold": "pass_all | pass_N",
  "cap": 4
}

Rules:

  • Criteria must be falsifiable — "no jargon visible to end-users", not "improve clarity".
  • Maximum 8 criteria. If the goal implies more, merge related ones.
  • Criteria are locked after Wave 1. The evaluator may not add or modify them.

Read the full file on GitHub · 140 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 140 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A 03c7d8d1f593

Subscribe to this mod's changes

polish is a skill published in the GitHub repository griffinwork40/agent-framework (23 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 1,204 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to polish, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

auto-perf-optimize

Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens