overengineering-review

overengineering-review is a skill for Codex from markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills. It costs 62 tokens per session (689 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review guide for finding complexity that does not earn its keep, such as unnecessary layers, duplicate helpers, or custom code that standard library features can replace.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review code or diffs for simplification, deletion, dependency replacement, and unnecessary flexibility.
Why use it?
It helps separate real design needs from code that makes changes harder to understand and maintain.

Skill for Codex

Written for Codex: agents/openai.yaml present.

Good fit Use it to review code or diffs for simplification, deletion, dependency replacement, and unnecessary flexibility.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills --skill overengineering-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills

Made for: Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for overengineering-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for overengineering-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/overengineering-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 62 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 689 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00062 $0.00689
Opus 5 $0.00031 $0.00345
Sonnet 5 $0.00012 $0.00138
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00069

Measured 11d ago against content hash 0dcd80f04aed, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

overengineering-review 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 11d 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.

skills/overengineering-review/SKILL.md · 95 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Overengineering Review

Review only for unnecessary complexity. This skill does not hunt general correctness issues unless they directly affect the simplification recommendation.

Pair With

  • Use minimal-diff-builder when the user wants the simplification findings turned into the smallest correct patch.
  • Use complexity-optimizer instead when the real question is performance or algorithmic cost rather than architectural bloat.
  • Use architecture-deepening-review instead when the code is not overbuilt but the boundary design is still wrong.

Review Surface

Look for:

  • needless abstractions;
  • replaceable dependencies;
  • dead flexibility;
  • wrappers around stdlib or native platform features;
  • local helpers or files that only forward to something simpler;
  • speculative extension points with one caller or one implementation.

Findings Taxonomy

Use these tags:

  • delete: code or layer can disappear entirely.
  • stdlib: custom logic should be replaced by a standard-library primitive.
  • native: use built-in platform behavior instead of app code or dependency code.
  • existing-dep: repo already ships a dependency that makes the extra code unnecessary.
  • yagni: speculative abstraction or configurability with no present payoff.
  • shrink: same behavior, fewer moving parts.

Workflow

  1. Determine scope:
    • diff review;
    • file review;
    • broad repo audit.
  2. Ignore style nitpicks that do not reduce real complexity.
  3. Rank findings by payoff:
    • dependency removal;
    • file/layer deletion;
    • abstraction collapse;
    • line-count shrink.
  4. For each finding, capture:
    • location;
    • tag;
    • what is overbuilt;
    • what replaces it;
    • why the simpler path still covers the requirement;
    • any safety caveat.
  5. Keep findings review-grade:
    • specific;
    • actionable;
    • minimal prose;
    • no vague "this feels complex" commentary.

Output Format

One finding per line in ranked order:

<file>:L<line> <tag> <what to cut>. <replacement>. <why it still covers the need>.

Read the full file on GitHub · 95 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 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.

Changes

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.

  1. 11d ago First seen · 95 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 0dcd80f04aed

Subscribe to this mod's changes

overengineering-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository markoblogo/abvx-agent-skills (16 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 689 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

printing-press-output-review

Internal sub-skill: agentic review of a printed CLI's sampled command output for plausibility issues that rule-based checks can't encode (substring-match relevance, format bugs, silent source drops, ranking failures). Invoked via the Skill tool by the main printing-press skill at Phase 4.85 and printing-press-polish…

mvanhorn/cli-printing-press · 102 tokens

systemic-issue-triage

Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.

Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai · 57 tokens

issue-root-resolution

Trigger: root audit, atacar la raíz, issue roots, backlog roots, mechanism map, deletion-driven fix, resolver issues de raíz, close outdated issues. Audit and resolve issue clusters by verified root cause.

Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai · 45 tokens

rdd-defect-workflow

Trigger: RDD, receipt-driven development, review authority, receipt/lineage, correction/recovery, delivery gate/kill switch, bounded review defects. Guide work.

Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai · 41 tokens

review-loop

Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…

sangrokjung/claude-forge · 100 tokens

semgrep-rule-creator

Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 37 tokens