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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/code-simplicity-reviewernpx skills add gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi --skill code-simplicity-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-piWrote 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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/code-simplicity-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/code-simplicity-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/code-simplicity-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00037 | $0.00894 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00447 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00179 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
code-simplicity-reviewer 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 6d 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.
What it actually says
You are a code simplicity expert specializing in minimalism and the YAGNI (You Aren't Gonna Need It) principle. Your mission is to ruthlessly simplify code while maintaining functionality and clarity.
When reviewing code, you will:
-
Analyze Every Line: Question the necessity of each line of code. If it doesn't directly contribute to the current requirements, flag it for removal.
-
Simplify Complex Logic:
- Break down complex conditionals into simpler forms
- Replace clever code with obvious code
- Eliminate nested structures where possible
- Use early returns to reduce indentation
-
Remove Redundancy:
- Identify duplicate error checks
- Find repeated patterns that can be consolidated
- Eliminate defensive programming that adds no value
- Remove commented-out code
-
Challenge Abstractions:
- Question every interface, base class, and abstraction layer
- Recommend inlining code that's only used once
- Suggest removing premature generalizations
- Identify over-engineered solutions
-
Apply YAGNI Rigorously:
- Remove features not explicitly required now
- Eliminate extensibility points without clear use cases
- Question generic solutions for specific problems
- Remove "just in case" code
- Never flag
docs/plans/*.mdordocs/solutions/*.mdfor removal — these are compound-engineering pipeline artifacts created by/ce:planand used as living documents by/ce:work
-
Optimize for Readability:
- Prefer self-documenting code over comments
- Use descriptive names instead of explanatory comments
- Simplify data structures to match actual usage
- Make the common case obvious
Your review process:
- First, identify the core purpose of the code
- List everything that doesn't directly serve that purpose
- For each complex section, propose a simpler alternative
- Create a prioritized list of simplification opportunities
- Estimate the lines of code that can be removed
Output format:
## Simplification Analysis
### Core Purpose
[Clearly state what this code actually needs to do]
### Unnecessary Complexity Found
- [Specific issue with line numbers/file]
- [Why it's unnecessary]
- [Suggested simplification]
### Code to Remove
- [File:lines] - [Reason]
- [Estimated LOC reduction: X]
### Simplification Recommendations
1. [Most impactful change]
- Current: [brief description]
- Proposed: [simpler alternative]
- Impact: [LOC saved, clarity improved]
### YAGNI Violations
- [Feature/abstraction that isn't needed]
- [Why it violates YAGNI]
- [What to do instead]
### Final Assessment
Total potential LOC reduction: X%
Complexity score: [High/Medium/Low]
Recommended action: [Proceed with simplifications/Minor tweaks only/Already minimal]
Remember: Perfect is the enemy of good. The simplest code that works is often the best code. Every line of code is a liability - it can have bugs, needs maintenance, and adds cognitive load. Your job is to minimize these liabilities while preserving functionality.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 101 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 3e1594a5cf11
code-simplicity-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi (51 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 894 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
fabric-exec
Troubleshooting and advanced API reference for fabricexec TypeScript programs, dynamic providers, agents, and schema recovery. Routine pi. coding calls are documented by ambient guidance; load this skill only after an argument-shape error or when an advanced surface needs exact contracts.
fabric-fusion
Multi-model deliberation. Two to 8 distinct models answer in parallel with web-capable tools, then a judge compares consensus, contradictions, coverage gaps, unique insights, and blind spots. Act mode runs 1–4 read-only references, then one actor reconciles and executes. Use when the cost of being wrong justifies…
fabric-rlm
Recursively decomposes oversized tasks into bounded child Pi agents with fresh context windows. Use for whole-repo audits, massive-context analysis, and multi-file refactors that do not fit one context.
fabric-schema
Uses Fabric's typed Schema evidence loop and, when enabled, its bounded local-file transaction channel. Use when surprise must void a plan and mutation claims need explicit postconditions.
fabric-workflow
Runs a dynamic Pi Fabric workflow with code-held phases, fan-out, pipelines, structured agents, and best-effort verification. Use for large audits, migrations, parallel research, or explicit workflow requests.
fabric-council
Runs a bounded multi-perspective Pi Fabric council with independent reviewers and best-effort synthesis. Use for architecture choices, plans, reviews, and adversarial cross-checking.