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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill simplify-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirotWrote 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/hezaohezao/poirot/simplify-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hezaohezao/poirot/simplify-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hezaohezao/poirot/simplify-code/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/hezaohezao/poirot/simplify-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hezaohezao/poirot/simplify-code.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 163 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00015 | $0.01884 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00754 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00377 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00188 |
Grade A, and why
simplify-code 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 — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Simplify Code — Sequential Review & Cleanup
Review your recent code changes with three focused lenses, aggregate findings, and apply the fixes worth applying.
Core principle: Three narrow reviews beat one broad review. Each one deeply searches the codebase for a single class of problem — reuse, quality, efficiency — without diluting attention across all three.
Poirot note: The original skill runs 3 reviewers in parallel via subagent delegation. Poirot has no subagents, so this version runs the 3 lenses sequentially in the same context. The methodology is identical; only the concurrency is lost.
When to Use
Trigger this skill when the user says any of:
- "simplify" / "simplify my changes" / "simplify these changes"
- "review my code" / "review my recent changes" / "clean up my changes"
Optional modifiers the user may add — honor them:
- Focus: "simplify focus on efficiency" → run only the efficiency lens.
Recognized focuses:
reuse,quality,efficiency. - Dry run: "simplify but don't change anything" / "just report" → run the three lenses, present findings, apply NOTHING. Ask before applying.
- Scope: "simplify the last commit" / "simplify staged" / "simplify src/foo.py" → narrow the diff source accordingly.
Do NOT auto-run this after every edit. Invoke it only when the user asks.
The Process
Phase 1 — Identify the changes
Capture the diff to review. Pick the source by what the user asked for:
# 1. Default: uncommitted working-tree changes (tracked files)
git diff
# 2. If that's empty, include staged changes
git diff HEAD
# 3. Scoped variants:
git diff --staged # "staged changes"
git diff HEAD~1 # "the last commit"
git diff main...HEAD # "this branch" / "my PR"
git diff -- src/foo.py # specific file(s)
If git diff and git diff HEAD are both empty, fall back to files the user
explicitly named or recently edited in this session. If you can't find any
changed code, say so and stop.
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 · 173 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A d468e9953f08
simplify-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository HezaoHezao/poirot (251 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,884 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
hqe
Comprehensive codebase health auditing, remediation, and verification skill based on the canonical HQE Protocol v5.0.0.
python-run
Run and debug Python scripts in the project. Use when the user says "run python", "execute this script", "debug this py file", or wants to run/modify a .py file. Handles dependency checks, linting, execution, and error analysis.
ai-slop-cleaner
Use when a working code path feels bloated, noisy, or over-abstracted, when asked to clean up or deslop AI-generated code, or when a reviewer-only anti-slop pass is requested.
sage-review
Deep, platform-neutral code review for PRs and CRs in ONE thorough single pass — design reasoning (Problem Worth Solving & Solution Fit) as one dimension alongside the 9 code-level dimensions, with chain-of-consequences, self-critique, and draft-only comments. The single app-owned source of truth.
rubber-duck
Adversarial "rubber duck" review that turns explaining-out-loud into a hallucination check. The main session is the PRESENTER (it did the work — a design doc, investigation, or analysis — and holds the real reasoning) and reconstructs the topic to a LISTENER — a spawned subagent pinned to a DIFFERENT-vendor model that…
learn-from-sage
Detection-gap (miss) analysis for Code Review Sage. Learn from shipped fixes, acted-on human comments, and design outcomes to close reviewer blind spots. Inline during review stages a candidate; a human triggers a one-shot AI consolidation into the live ruleset.