Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/main/.claude/skills/gitnexus/gitnexus-refactoring/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-opsWrote 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/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/gitnexus-refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/gitnexus-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/gitnexus-refactoring/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/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/gitnexus-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops/gitnexus-refactoring.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 | $0.00053 | $0.00961 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00481 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00192 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00096 |
Grade A, and why
gitnexus-refactoring 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 8d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to gitnexus-refactoring — 10 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactoring with GitNexus
When to Use
- "Rename this function safely"
- "Extract this into a module"
- "Split this service"
- "Move this to a new file"
- Any task involving renaming, extracting, splitting, or restructuring code
Workflow
1. impact({target: "X", direction: "upstream"}) → Map all dependents
2. query({query: "X"}) → Find execution flows involving X
3. context({name: "X"}) → See all incoming/outgoing refs
4. Plan update order: interfaces → implementations → callers → tests
If "Index is stale" → run
node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyzein terminal.
Checklists
Rename Symbol
- [ ] rename({symbol_name: "oldName", new_name: "newName", dry_run: true}) — preview all edits
- [ ] Review graph edits (high confidence) and ast_search edits (review carefully)
- [ ] If satisfied: rename({..., dry_run: false}) — apply edits
- [ ] detect_changes() — verify only expected files changed
- [ ] Run tests for affected processes
Extract Module
- [ ] context({name: target}) — see all incoming/outgoing refs
- [ ] impact({target, direction: "upstream"}) — find all external callers
- [ ] Define new module interface
- [ ] Extract code, update imports
- [ ] detect_changes() — verify affected scope
- [ ] Run tests for affected processes
Split Function/Service
- [ ] context({name: target}) — understand all callees
- [ ] Group callees by responsibility
- [ ] impact({target, direction: "upstream"}) — map callers to update
- [ ] Create new functions/services
- [ ] Update callers
- [ ] detect_changes() — verify affected scope
- [ ] Run tests for affected processes
Tools
rename — automated multi-file rename:
rename({symbol_name: "validateUser", new_name: "authenticateUser", dry_run: true})
→ 12 edits across 8 files
→ 10 graph edits (high confidence), 2 ast_search edits (review)
→ Changes: [{file_path, edits: [{line, old_text, new_text, confidence}]}]
impact — map all dependents first:
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 122 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A f75435004bee
gitnexus-refactoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository jinnnyang/llm-wiki-ops (0 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 961 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to gitnexus-refactoring, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…