s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing

s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing is a skill for Claude Code from human-avatar/skills-for-humanity. It costs 71 tokens per session (1,268 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review method for finding unnecessary complexity in a design, plan, process, or software system.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to examine whether a solution is over-engineered, check each part's purpose, and look for a simpler approach.
Why use it?
It helps reveal additions that no longer serve the main purpose and makes it easier to decide what can be removed or simplified.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool.

Part of the skills-for-humanity plugin — 197 skills, 1 hook shipped together

Good fit Use it to examine whether a solution is over-engineered, check each part's purpose, and look for a simpler approach.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing
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.

Any agent
npx skills add human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install skills-for-humanity, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 197 skills, 1 hook.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 71 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,268 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found 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 5.1 $0.00071 $0.01268
Opus 5 $0.00036 $0.00634
Sonnet 5 $0.00014 $0.00254
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00127

Measured 12d ago against content hash 37b2eefa3cbf, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing 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 12d 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

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

skills/s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing/SKILL.md · 120 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Aesthetic Elegance Testing

Complexity is the default outcome of design by committee, incremental revision, and deference to edge cases. Each addition is locally defensible. The cumulative result is a system no one would have designed on purpose. Elegance is not simplicity for its own sake — it is the property of a solution where every element earns its place and nothing obscures the core. This skill tests for that property.


Your Process

Step 1: State the Solution Describe the design, plan, system, or solution in enough detail to evaluate its parts. If it's a process, name the steps. If it's a system, name the components. If it's a strategy, name the moves.

Framing check: Confirm the specific solution before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual artifact being tested and its apparent purpose — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:

  • Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the solution and what it is meant to accomplish]. Is that right?"
  • Header: "Framing"
  • Options:
    • Yes — proceed — framing is correct
    • Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
    • Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding

Step 2: Define the Irreducible Core What is the minimum that does the job? State in one sentence what the solution must accomplish to succeed. Every element that doesn't directly serve this core is a candidate for removal. If you can't state the core in one sentence, the solution may not have one — which is itself a finding.

Step 3: Element Audit For each component, mechanism, layer, or step: is it necessary for the core job, or did it accrete over time to handle edge cases, satisfy stakeholder requests, hedge against unlikely scenarios, or address problems that may not exist? Label each clearly: necessary or accreted.

Step 4: Concept Count How many distinct concepts must a new person learn to understand and use this solution fully? Elegant solutions have fewer. Count them explicitly. Compare against the irreducible minimum — the number of concepts required if every accreted element were removed. The gap is the complexity overhead.

Read the full file on GitHub · 120 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. 12d ago First seen · 120 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A 37b2eefa3cbf

Subscribe to this mod's changes

s4h-aesthetic-elegance-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository human-avatar/skills-for-humanity (223 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 1,268 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

second-pass-review

Independent audit of sanitized specs in workspace/output/. Three parallel LLM-based reviewer roles check structural leakage, content contamination, and behavioral completeness. Run AFTER Layer 5 sanitization, BEFORE implementation handoff.

prime-radiant-inc/greenfield · 44 tokens

check-pr

Read-only inspection of a single GitHub PR lifecycle — checks CI, review threads, description sync, and mergeability, and returns PASS or FAIL with per-gate findings. Never invokes the merge button. Use when verifying a PR is ready to merge, polling lifecycle progress, checking mergeability, or babysitting a GitHub PR…

doodledood/manifest-dev · 74 tokens

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…

Sateezg/codex-bridge · 78 tokens

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…

fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills · 75 tokens

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".

OutlineDriven/odin-claude-plugin · 50 tokens

genshijin-review

A compact pull-request review format that writes one actionable finding per line in Japanese or English.

InterfaceX-co-jp/genshijin · 78 tokens