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 joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills --skill reducing-entropygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skillsWrote 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/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills/reducing-entropy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills/reducing-entropy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills/reducing-entropy/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/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills/reducing-entropy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills/reducing-entropy.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 | $0.00038 | $0.00598 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00239 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00120 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
reducing-entropy 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 1mo 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
94% identical to reducing-entropy — 2 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 — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reducing Entropy
More code begets more code. Entropy accumulates. This skill biases toward the smallest possible codebase.
Core question: "What does the codebase look like after?"
Before You Begin
Load at least one mindset from references/
- List the files in the reference directory
- Read frontmatter descriptions to pick which applies
- Load at least one
- State which you loaded and its core principle
Do not proceed until you've done this.
The Goal
The goal is less total code in the final codebase - not less code to write right now.
- Writing 50 lines that delete 200 lines = net win
- Keeping 14 functions to avoid writing 2 = net loss
- "No churn" is not a goal. Less code is the goal.
Measure the end state, not the effort.
Three Questions
1. What's the smallest codebase that solves this?
Not "what's the smallest change" - what's the smallest result.
- Could this be 2 functions instead of 14?
- Could this be 0 functions (delete the feature)?
- What would we delete if we did this?
2. Does the proposed change result in less total code?
Count lines before and after. If after > before, reject it.
- "Better organized" but more code = more entropy
- "More flexible" but more code = more entropy
- "Cleaner separation" but more code = more entropy
3. What can we delete?
Every change is an opportunity to delete. Ask:
- What does this make obsolete?
- What was only needed because of what we're replacing?
- What's the maximum we could remove?
Red Flags
- "Keep what exists" - Status quo bias. The question is total code, not churn.
- "This adds flexibility" - Flexibility for what? YAGNI.
- "Better separation of concerns" - More files/functions = more code. Separation isn't free.
- "Type safety" - Worth how many lines? Sometimes runtime checks in less code wins.
- "Easier to understand" - 14 things are not easier than 2 things.
When This Doesn't Apply
- The codebase is already minimal for what it does
- You're in a framework with strong conventions (don't fight it)
- Regulatory/compliance requirements mandate certain structures
What ships with it
5 files 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 82 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 227438f347b6
reducing-entropy is a skill published in the GitHub repository joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills (58 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 598 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 94% identical to reducing-entropy, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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"…
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…
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…
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…