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 Jartan-LLC/grimoire --skill comment-hygienegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jartan-LLC/grimoireWrote 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/jartan-llc/grimoire/comment-hygiene)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jartan-llc/grimoire/comment-hygiene"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jartan-llc/grimoire/comment-hygiene/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/jartan-llc/grimoire/comment-hygiene"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jartan-llc/grimoire/comment-hygiene.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 | $0.00066 | $0.03132 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.01566 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00626 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00313 |
Grade A, and why
comment-hygiene 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 9d 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 — 105 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comment Hygiene
Split from code-hygiene -- this is comment truthfulness only; dead code, reinvention/duplication, naming, and faking done stay in code-hygiene, which this skill sits alongside as a sibling of code-structure (the units and their contracts) and readable-code (how a body reads).
A comment earns its place only by telling the reader something the code cannot. Sharp test: could a competent reader recover this fact from the code (and the repo)? Yes -> delete; No -> maybe keep. One fact survives that test despite being recoverable -- the sole exception, so bake it into the test: a legal/provenance header is recoverable from LICENSE yet kept inline by mandate (see EXEMPT). The external-anchor WHY looks like a second exception but isn't one: naming a constant recovers its value, never the spec/constraint that dictated it, so that rationale stays genuinely unrecoverable and keeps on the mainline (see KEEP).
This truthfulness standard applies wherever the annotation lives -- inline comment, block comment, or docstring/doc-comment prose. A doc-comment that restates the signature, lies about behavior, or narrates a change is the same anti-pattern as an inline one. Docstring format/completeness defers to the language plugin (pythonica); prose quality to docs-patterns.
KEEP -- the code can't say it
Phrase each against the invariant that motivates it, not the current mechanics -- evergreen, so a refactor leaves it true.
- WHY / rationale -- the constraint that forced a non-obvious choice, the tradeoff, or the obvious alternative rejected and why (a performance hack that replaces the clean form belongs here -- say so and cite the evidence: hot path, measured Nx).
# gh resolves the repo from GH_REPO, so no checkout; the guard keeps re-runs idempotent - GOTCHA / footgun -- name the surprising fact, then why it must be so: a side effect a caller can't infer (a read that writes, a getter that primes a cache, hidden I/O or global mutation), an ordering dependency (say what silently breaks if reordered), a looks-wrong-but-right oddity (a correct off-by-one, a deliberate bare except), a cost/thread hazard, or a decode of genuinely inscrutable syntax. A warning without its why is just a WHAT-comment with an alarm on it. Delete it the moment the hazard is removed, or it becomes a phantom warning.
# <= not <: the upper bound is inclusive per the wire spec - EXTERNAL ANCHOR -- a citation to the spec/RFC/ticket/paper/formula/legal requirement that dictates the code's shape. The most rot-resistant comment there is: its source of truth is versioned and changes deliberately elsewhere. Distinguish from Nonlocal (DELETE): citing a versioned spec/RFC/ticket anchors (keep); mirroring a value a live, mutable config or another service owns only drifts (delete).
# 0x5F3759DF: fast inverse-sqrt magic constant, see Quake III src
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 105 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A f7635eb1073e
comment-hygiene is a skill published in the GitHub repository Jartan-LLC/grimoire (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 3,132 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-arch
Conduct a principal-level architecture review of a system, specification, diagram, or set of design decisions. Use when asked to review an architecture, evaluate a design, assess coupling/cohesion, check for anti-patterns, audit system boundaries, or produce an Architecture Review Board (ARB) style verdict. Also use…
review-impl
Review implementation changes for a given task against architectural standards. Use when reviewing a PR, evaluating recently committed code, assessing whether implementation changes are correct and architecturally sound, or when asked to 'review my changes', 'check this implementation', 'review what I built', 'is this…
survey
After building a feature (or evaluating a plan), verify it matches what was planned, respects the project's declared architecture and standards, and is production-ready. Reports issues clearly and routes broken behavior to dredge or contested judgment calls to watershed.
watershed
Get a wider, multi-angle critique of code, a plan, or an idea through five distinct critical perspectives, followed by a sixth consolidation pass. Use when a decision is contested, high-stakes, or one careful survey is not enough.
design-parity-review
Prove a Compose UI pull request matches its intended design by diffing the rendered code (candidate) against a Figma / Stitch / Claude Design reference and posting a parity verdict. Use when asked to check a PR against a design, wire up a design-parity bot, set up the committed reference cache so runs make zero Figma…
babysit-pr
Resolve reviewer comments on a pull request or pasted feedback using a six-step evidence-grounded protocol. Use when asked to resolve review feedback, address reviewer comments, process PR comments, triage review feedback, apply review suggestions, handle code review feedback, decide which review comments to accept or…