Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JansenAnalytics/claudexnpx agentmods add skills/jansenanalytics/claudex/refactorWrote 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/jansenanalytics/claudex/refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jansenanalytics/claudex/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jansenanalytics/claudex/refactor.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00429 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00215 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00086 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 4d 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
refactor
Large-scale codebase restructuring: rename, extract, inline, move modules, update imports. Use when: restructuring project layout, extracting components/functions, renaming across files, splitting monoliths, or modernizing legacy code patterns.
Usage
Dead Code Finder
bash scripts/dead-code-finder.sh [path]
Finds exported functions/classes that are never imported elsewhere.
Import Path Updater
bash scripts/import-updater.sh <old-path> <new-path> [search-dir]
Updates all import/require statements when a module is moved.
Dependency Graph
bash scripts/dep-graph.sh [path]
Builds a text-based dependency graph showing which files import which.
When to Use
- Moving files/modules and updating all imports
- Finding dead code before cleanup
- Understanding dependency structure before restructuring
- Extracting components from a monolith
- Renaming modules across a codebase
Safe Refactoring Workflow
- Run
dep-graph.shto understand current structure - Run
dead-code-finder.shto identify removable code - Make structural changes
- Run
import-updater.shto fix import paths - Run tests to verify nothing broke
Resources
scripts/dead-code-finder.sh— Find unused exportsscripts/import-updater.sh— Update import paths after movesscripts/dep-graph.sh— Build dependency graphreferences/refactoring-patterns.md— Common refactoring patternsreferences/safe-refactoring-steps.md— Step-by-step safe refactoring
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 62 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A d672904c5b5f
refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository JansenAnalytics/claudex (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 429 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
principal-maintainability-review
Review maintainability like a principal engineer. Use when the user asks what a senior, staff, principal, or highly opinionated maintainer would notice, whether code looks vibe-coded, what is gross, what should be fundamentally different, or which architecture smells matter beyond ordinary deduplication. Finds…
scip-system-compression
Compress systems with scip-query evidence. Use to zoom out, simplify architecture, eliminate layers, consolidate commands, scripts, or helpers, find the deeper role behind unlike-looking code, build a compression atlas before a large cleanup, or execute an ordered simplification without rework.
scip-integrity-audit
Audit whether implementations are real with scip-query. Use for suspected faked or half-implemented features, decorative checkers or verifiers that never fail, dead code paths hidden behind graceful fallbacks, metrics that may be lying, or a "does any of this actually work" interrogation of a system.
scip-root-cause
Diagnose the design flaw behind a family of related bugs with scip-query evidence. Use when similar bugs keep recurring, the same subsystem keeps needing patches, or the user lists fixed or observed bugs and asks what is really wrong; produces a falsifiable flaw diagnosis, a latent-instance hunt, and the least…
scip-claim-audit
Audit output-facing status claims for evidence with scip-query. Use to classify whether an "available", "verified", "safe", "PASS", or "complete" status word is derived from a real check, hedged as a candidate, or merely asserted without being probed.
scip-probe-reachability
Prove whether a parser or AST branch is actually reachable by running the real parser on minimal inputs. Use for unreachable or dead node-type or shape branches, wrong node-type strings, tree-sitter grammar mismatches, or any conditional written for an AST or parser output that has never been checked against the real…