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 jnPiyush/AgentX --skill code-hygienegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jnPiyush/AgentXWrote 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/jnpiyush/agentx/code-hygiene)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jnpiyush/agentx/code-hygiene"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jnpiyush/agentx/code-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/jnpiyush/agentx/code-hygiene"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jnpiyush/agentx/code-hygiene.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00034 | $0.01305 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00522 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00261 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 7d 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 — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Hygiene Sweep
Three parallel analysis passes that detect and report common quality issues from AI-assisted coding -- over-engineering, stale or filler comments, and generic UI patterns that signal templated output.
Cleanup Boundary
Cosmetic lint/style findings are LOW and do not block local loop/review Done Criteria. Report file/line, original tool severity, suggestion and scope; do not clean up automatically. The owning agent explicitly asks whether the user wants the findings fixed and waits. No response or a decline means leave them unchanged.
Build/type failures and verified correctness, security, reliability or
accessibility defects are not cosmetic lint; classify them separately by impact.
Do not waive independent CI/commit/release gates. Full policy:
.github/AGENT-PROTOCOL.md section 4.
When to Use
- After completing a feature -- sweep before PR
- Before code review -- pre-clean changed files
- When code feels templated or over-abstracted
- Periodic codebase hygiene on a directory
- After a long AI-assisted session to audit quality
Argument Parsing
Parse arguments for these tokens:
| Token | Example | Effect |
|---|---|---|
fix |
Explicit request to fix the listed cleanup scope | Apply only after affirmative approval; a role name, quoted/negated word or general bug-fix task is not consent |
<path> |
src/components/ |
Scope to specific file or directory |
| (none) | Default | Analyze all files changed since the base branch |
Execution Flow
Stage 1: Determine Scope
If a file or directory path is provided: Scope to that path. Use glob to list all code files under it.
If no argument (default): Determine changed files since the base branch:
BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD origin/main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD origin/master 2>/dev/null || echo "HEAD~10")
git diff --name-only $BASE
Classify files in scope:
| File extensions | Passes to run |
|---|---|
.ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .py, .go, .rb, .rs, .java, .cs, .swift, .kt |
Code Quality + Comment Quality |
.css, .scss, .less, .tsx, .jsx, .html, .vue, .svelte |
+ UI Quality |
.json, .yaml, .yml, .toml, .md |
Code Quality + Comment Quality only |
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.
- 7d ago Changed · -84 lines · -5 tokens per session a2f126da7149
- 1mo ago First seen · 234 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A bb623efe21f2
code-hygiene is a skill published in the GitHub repository jnPiyush/AgentX (16 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,305 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…