Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to julien777z/code-review-action. 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/julien777z/code-review-action/main/.agents/skills/code-simplify/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/julien777z/code-review-actionWrote 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/julien777z/code-review-action/code-simplify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/julien777z/code-review-action/code-simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/julien777z/code-review-action/code-simplify/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/julien777z/code-review-action/code-simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/julien777z/code-review-action/code-simplify.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 | $0.00055 | $0.03636 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.01454 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00727 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00364 |
Grade A, and why
code-simplify 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 2mo 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 code-simplify — 0 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 — 218 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Simplify
Use this skill for an unusually strict review focused on implementation quality, maintainability, abstraction quality, and codebase health.
Above all, this skill should push the reviewer to be ambitious about code structure. Do not merely identify local cleanup opportunities. Actively search for "code judo" moves: restructurings that preserve behavior while making the implementation dramatically simpler, smaller, more direct, and more elegant.
Applying fixes
This skill does not stop at review: apply the simplifications you identify directly to the working tree. Make every behavior-preserving change you would otherwise only recommend — restructure, extract, delete indirection, collapse branches, reuse the canonical helper — and keep those edits in the commit you are working on. Treat the review questions and approval bar below as the checklist for what to fix, not merely what to flag.
Preserve observable behavior and the external contracts tests can't see — including on the default pre-push pass. The pre-push pass runs automatically and cannot assume a full test run, so while simplifying do not change a contract that code or systems outside this diff depend on: public routes and their request/response shapes, durable identifiers (handler, event, queue, and state keys), persisted on-disk or on-the-wire formats (DB columns, migrations, serialized payloads), and cross-package shared DTOs or config keys. Do not introduce pass-through shims to fake an unchanged signature — adjust the real call sites instead. When a worthwhile simplification would alter one of these, leave a written note rather than applying it silently. A deliberate, test-verified broader-scope request may restructure internal code and in-repository API shapes when the suite proves behavior is preserved.
Running the pass
Review small scopes in process. A scope is small when one reviewer can hold the complete diff, every touched file, and the relevant siblings at once without losing context. Focused changes to one or a few files, especially documentation or configuration changes, normally qualify. Do not spawn subagents merely because the host exposes them, and do not add a cross-cutting reviewer for a small scope.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 218 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 997409fc937b
code-simplify is a skill published in the GitHub repository julien777z/code-review-action (2 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 3,636 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to code-simplify, differing in 0 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"…
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…
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…