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 Metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills --skill dotnet-techne-crap-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Metalnib/dotnet-episteme-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/metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills/dotnet-techne-crap-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills/dotnet-techne-crap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills/dotnet-techne-crap-analysis/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/metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills/dotnet-techne-crap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills/dotnet-techne-crap-analysis.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 | $0.00050 | $0.02840 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.01420 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00568 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00284 |
Grade C, and why
dotnet-techne-crap-analysis scanned grade C with 1 finding 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 12d 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.
Recursive force deletehighDestructive command
rm -rf with a variable or a broad path is one typo away from removing the wrong tree.
rm -rf coverage/ TestResults/ This is a copy
91% identical to crap-analysis — 16 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 — 398 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CRAP Score Analysis
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
- Evaluating code quality and test coverage before changes
- Identifying high-risk code that needs refactoring or testing
- Setting up coverage collection for a .NET project
- Prioritizing which code to test based on risk
- Establishing coverage thresholds for CI/CD pipelines
What is CRAP?
CRAP Score = Complexity x (1 - Coverage)^2
The CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) score combines cyclomatic complexity with test coverage to identify risky code.
| CRAP Score | Risk Level | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| < 5 | Low | Well-tested, maintainable code |
| 5-30 | Medium | Acceptable but watch complexity |
| > 30 | High | Needs tests or refactoring |
Why CRAP Matters
- High complexity + low coverage = danger: Code that's hard to understand AND untested is risky to modify
- Complexity alone isn't enough: A complex method with 100% coverage is safer than a simple method with 0%
- Focuses effort: Prioritize testing on complex code, not simple getters/setters
CRAP Score Examples
| Method | Complexity | Coverage | Calculation | CRAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GetUserId() |
1 | 0% | 1 x (1 - 0)^2 | 1 |
ParseToken() |
54 | 52% | 54 x (1 - 0.52)^2 | 12.4 |
ValidateForm() |
20 | 0% | 20 x (1 - 0)^2 | 20 |
ProcessOrder() |
45 | 20% | 45 x (1 - 0.20)^2 | 28.8 |
ImportData() |
80 | 10% | 80 x (1 - 0.10)^2 | 64.8 |
Coverage Collection Setup
coverage.runsettings
Create a coverage.runsettings file in your repository root. The OpenCover format is required for CRAP score calculation because it includes cyclomatic complexity metrics.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<RunSettings>
<DataCollectionRunSettings>
<DataCollectors>
<DataCollector friendlyName="XPlat code coverage">
<Configuration>
<!-- OpenCover format includes cyclomatic complexity for CRAP scores -->
<Format>cobertura,opencover</Format>
<!-- Exclude test and benchmark assemblies -->
<Exclude>[*.Tests]*,[*.Benchmark]*,[*.Migrations]*</Exclude>
<!-- Exclude generated code, obsolete members, and explicit exclusions -->
<ExcludeByAttribute>Obsolete,GeneratedCodeAttribute,CompilerGeneratedAttribute,ExcludeFromCodeCoverageAttribute</ExcludeByAttribute>
<!-- Exclude source-generated files, Blazor generated code, and migrations -->
<ExcludeByFile>**/obj/**/*,**/*.g.cs,**/*.designer.cs,**/*.razor.g.cs,**/*.razor.css.g.cs,**/Migrations/**/*</ExcludeByFile>
<!-- Exclude test projects -->
<IncludeTestAssembly>false</IncludeTestAssembly>
<!-- Optimization flags -->
<SingleHit>false</SingleHit>
<UseSourceLink>true</UseSourceLink>
<SkipAutoProps>true</SkipAutoProps>
</Configuration>
</DataCollector>
</DataCollectors>
</DataCollectionRunSettings>
</RunSettings>
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 398 lines · 50 tokens per session scan C 080be18e129c
dotnet-techne-crap-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository Metalnib/dotnet-episteme-skills (12 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 2,840 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (recursive force delete). It is 91% identical to crap-analysis, differing in 16 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
improve-code-quality
Guided journey from a working-but-untested vibe-coded prototype to a production-ready product with tests, clean structure, a business-rules boundary, and resilience at scale. Orchestrates nine skills phase by phase - working-with-legacy-code, clean-code, refactoring-patterns, software-design-philosophy…
refactor
Refactors code for quality and maintainability. Triggers: refactor, clean up, restructure, improve code, modernize.
prompt-caching-patterns
Anthropic API prompt caching: TTL, breakpoints, stacking, invalidation, hit rate. Triggers: prompt caching, cachecontrol, cache breakpoint, cache TTL, hit rate.
code-review
Review .NET changes for bugs, regressions, architectural drift, missing tests, incorrect async or disposal behavior, and platform-specific pitfalls before you approve or merge them. USE FOR: reviewing a pull request or patch in a .NET repository; checking for behavioral regressions, API misuse, or missing tests…
test-verification
Requires behavioral, failure-path, and durable-seam evidence for tests and review. Use when writing tests, reviewing test coverage, assessing behavioral test quality, or accepting high-risk behavior on test evidence.
dotnet-best-practices
Ensure .NET/C# code follows maintainable, modern best practices. Use when reviewing or improving C# code, solution structure, async patterns, dependency injection, or testability.