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 kreek/consult --skill refactoringgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kreek/consultWrote 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/kreek/consult/refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kreek/consult/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kreek/consult/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/kreek/consult/refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kreek/consult/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 | $0.00025 | $0.00774 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00310 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00155 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
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 16d 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactoring
Iron Law
GREEN BEFORE THE REFACTOR. GREEN AFTER EACH STEP. NEVER MIX STRUCTURE AND BEHAVIOR IN ONE COMMIT.
When to Use
- Changing structure while preserving behavior: legacy refactors, large renames, extractions, migrations, branch by abstraction, strangler fig, characterization tests, big-bang rewrite avoidance.
When NOT to Use
- Behavior-first feature work; use
proof. - Commit grouping or history surgery after changes exist; use
commitorgit-workflow.
Rules
- Every commit is structural or behavioral, never both. Opportunistic tweaks and behavior fixes go in separate behavior commits or are left out.
- Name the coupling being separated (data shape, side effect, module boundary, ownership, time, transport, persistence, compatibility) before code moves. "Extract a helper to shorten this" is not a named coupling.
- Each behavior-preservation claim gets a Proof Contract: unchanged behavior, invariant, public boundary, before/after check, evidence. Add characterization tests where coverage is missing. An unproven refactor is reported as unproven.
- For public interfaces, use parallel change: expand, migrate callers, contract. Ask which callers, data, and releases must keep working before adding shims, dual paths, or migration machinery.
- Delete old paths only when verification proves callers and traffic have moved. Leftover migration or deletion work has an owner and a deadline.
- For broad renames, write a rename map first, separating private symbols, file paths, runtime and public keys, persisted names, docs, and compatibility cleanup.
- Shorter is simpler only when it hides no state, effect, compatibility, ownership, or independent behavior. Simplification removes complexity with a named cost: hidden mutable state, unnecessary layer, broad helper, scattered behavior, compatibility shim, dead flag, duplicated rule with divergent meaning.
- Deleted tests are replaced by equal or stronger behavior coverage.
- No big-bang rewrites. Take the next safe slice or a branch-by-abstraction path; the system is shippable at every commit.
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.
- 16d ago Changed · +6 tokens per session a97e6d62c4fb
- 1mo ago Changed · -30 lines a8f8b92a4e0b
- 1mo ago First seen · 100 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A e810cdadbc1b
refactoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository kreek/consult (1 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 774 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
arch-review
Team baseline for architecture, design-doc, and RFC review — produces summary, strengths, concerns, and open questions. Auto-triggers when you say review this design, review this architecture, review this proposal, review my RFC, poke holes in this proposal, is this design sound, or critique this tech spec. Defers to…
clarify
Lightweight spec clarification scan for jig projects — a six-category ambiguity audit that asks up to five prioritized questions and appends them to the spec's ## Clarifications section. Auto-triggers when you say clarify this spec, audit this spec for ambiguities, is this spec ready for review, find unknowns in this…
explain
Explain jig vocabulary and artifacts in plain language. Three modes: term mode defines one lexicon term; artifact mode walks through a spec or ADR and its linked references; passage mode explains pasted jig output. Output is ephemeral (chat-only). Auto-triggers when you say explain this term, walk me through this…
pr-review
Team baseline for PR and code review — produces scope, blockers, nits, and strengths. Auto-triggers when you say review this PR, check this diff, review these changes, pre-review before I share, what do you think of this PR, or review the diff on this branch. Defers to any other installed skill whose description…
security-review
Team baseline for security review — a best-effort heuristic security pass over a diff or change-set. Auto-triggers for review this for security, any vulnerabilities here, security pass on this diff, is this code secure, check this for security issues, or security review this. Uses installed scanners when available…
contracts
Team baseline for external-interface contract artifacts: OpenAPI, JSON Schema, AsyncAPI, .proto, and GraphQL SDL, with spectral, ajv, buf, and graphql-inspector validation. Nudges devs toward contract-first artifacts; never writes them and never scaffolds a contracts/ directory. Auto-triggers for what contract should…