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 hmj1026/dhpk --skill code-simplifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hmj1026/dhpkWrote 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/hmj1026/dhpk/code-simplify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/code-simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/code-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/hmj1026/dhpk/code-simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/code-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 | $0.00062 | $0.01350 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00540 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 yesterday.
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 — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code simplification
This is a behavior-preserving quality pass over the resolved change scope.
Use $ARGUMENTS when a target is explicit; otherwise review the current
change. Keep fixes inside that scope and leave correctness verdicts to a
read-only review workflow such as $change-verdict --mode code.
When NOT to Use
- A bug, security issue, or correctness concern needs judging: use the relevant review or diagnosis workflow first.
- The requested change is a feature or architecture redesign rather than a cleanup of existing changes.
- The target cannot be resolved, has no changes, or its baseline test fails without explicit acceptance of that known failure.
Workflow
-
Resolve the scope. An explicit target always wins:
- Existing file/directory: review its full contents and run
git diff HEAD -- "$ARGUMENTS"; keep the path quoted after--. - Pull request number, URL, or
#number: verify it and gathergh pr diff "$ARGUMENTS". - Branch or commit ref: verify it, identify its upstream or repository
default branch, compute
git merge-base <target> <base>, then gather the target diff withgit diff <merge-base>...<target>. - Anything else is
BLOCKED; never fall back to the current branch for an invalid explicit target.
Without an explicit target, try
git diff @{upstream}...HEAD, thengit diff main...HEAD, thengit diff HEAD~1. If the worktree is dirty or the range is empty, also includegit diff HEAD. Stop withnothing to simplifywhen the resolved scope has no changes. - Existing file/directory: review its full contents and run
-
Establish the baseline. Resolve the repository’s relevant test command, run it before editing, and record the exact command and result. Stop when it fails unless the caller explicitly accepts that known failure.
-
Review four angles. If the host can fan out registered read-only workers, dispatch four independent workers concurrently with the same scope and exactly one angle each. If fan-out is unavailable, the current worker is nested, or one reviewer fails, perform only the missing angles inline and mark the result degraded. Each finding records
file,line, a one-line summary, and its concrete cost.
What ships with it
3 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.
- yesterday Changed · +8 lines 7ee1e6e8a55b
- 23d ago First seen · 122 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 60e0d0ae296a
code-simplify is a skill published in the GitHub repository hmj1026/dhpk (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 1,350 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 2026-09-24.
Other skills, from other repositories
evaluator-review-contract
Internal Auto-Harness evaluator skill for sprint contract review before implementation. Use only inside the Evaluator subagent during review mode.
genshijin-review
A compact pull-request review format that writes one actionable finding per line in Japanese or English.
triage
Triages a PR comment — from a bot (Copilot, CI) or a human reviewer. Routes to the triagehelper.py helper for identity checks, thread snapshotting, isolated-worktree fixes, and publish/reply/resolve mechanics; you classify the finding and apply a justified fix. --dry-run is fully read-only (investigation and a printed…
audit-project
Run an iterative multi-agent code audit until critical and high findings are resolved. Use when the user says "audit my code", "find all the bugs", "deep code audit", "iterative review", or "review until clean".
codex-review
Get an independent code review from OpenAI Codex (GPT-5) on uncommitted changes, a branch diff, a PR, or a specific module — returns findings grouped by severity with file:line references. Use when the user says "review this", "review my changes", "check this PR", "what did I miss", or before they commit or merge…
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…