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 mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLIC --skill improve-codebase-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLICWrote 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/mattmre/evokore-mcp-public/improve-codebase-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mattmre/evokore-mcp-public/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mattmre/evokore-mcp-public/improve-codebase-architecture/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/mattmre/evokore-mcp-public/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mattmre/evokore-mcp-public/improve-codebase-architecture.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 | $0.00061 | $0.02190 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.01095 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00438 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00219 |
Grade A, and why
improve-codebase-architecture 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 9d 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Improve Codebase Architecture
Surface architectural friction inside one EVOKORE bounded context and propose deepening opportunities — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability, locality, and AI-navigability. Vocabulary is shared and load-bearing: see ./LANGUAGE.md.
When to use this skill
Use when an operator or panel asks for an architectural review, a deepening pass, or refactor candidates inside a specific area of EVOKORE — not for repo-wide audits.
Adjacency precondition (HARD GATE): before producing any candidate, identify the EVOKORE bounded context the target module lives in. Read docs/adr/0005-bounded-contexts.md and name one of the eight contexts (Skill Registry & Discovery, Proxy & Routing, Auth & Security, Session & Continuity, Orchestration & Fleet, Audit & Webhooks, Telemetry & Analytics, Memory & Knowledge). If you cannot name the bounded context this module belongs to (per ADR-0005), STOP and invoke domain-model discipline first — that aep-framework Phase 1 step gives you the context map.
This skill REFUSES to operate repo-wide. One bounded context per invocation. A repo-wide deepening pass is a meta-task and must be split into one invocation per context, with each context's findings reviewed independently.
Trigger phrases that should activate this skill:
- "find deepening opportunities in the Proxy & Routing context"
- "review the SkillManager / Skill Registry context for shallow modules"
- "where are the leaky seams in Session & Continuity?"
- "apply the deletion test to "
Do not use this skill for:
- Cross-cutting refactors that span multiple bounded contexts (split per context first, or run
orch-planto sequence them). - Behaviour changes (this skill is invariant-preserving; it proposes shape changes only).
- Routine code review — use
orch-reviewor the panel-of-experts code-quality panel instead (aliascode-experts).
What ships with it
3 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 108 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 10247a1c88bd
improve-codebase-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLIC (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 2,190 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review-architecture
Architecture-focused code review covering hexagonal boundary violations, DDD anti-patterns, CQRS misuse, and microservices coupling issues. Applied in addition to the language-specific review skill when architecture markers are detected. Invoked when reviewing hexagonal architectures, DDD patterns, or microservices…
auto-review
Use this skill to configure and understand the built-in auto-review plugin (wstack-auto-review) that fires automated code review subagents on every code change during a session. Triggers: user says "auto review", "otomatik review", "auto code review", "her değişiklikte review", "/auto-review".
reviewing-changes
Use when a review package asks you to review a plan step's change set (todo.startReview): you are the REVIEWER, not the author. How to judge an agent-written diff, file findings with addreviewcomment, and settle with exactly one reviewverdict.
reflecting-findings
Use when a reflection package hands you another agent's review findings to verify (before they become a fix request): you are the REFLECTOR, an independent skeptic. Judge each finding against the real code and settle it with reflectfinding — kept or refuted.
verify
Answer "is this shippable / done?" with evidence before a commit or PR — fires on "verify", "is this done", "ready to ship?", pre-commit or pre-PR. Part of the Agentsmith harness; runs the project's verify phases and never claims "passing" without showing the output (R5).
refactoring-workflow
Improve the structure of existing code without changing its behaviour, in small verified steps under a green test suite. Use when the user asks to refactor, clean up, restructure or simplify code, wants to reduce duplication or coupling, is preparing a codebase for a feature it cannot currently accommodate, or when…