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 msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins --skill introduce-parameter-objectgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/msbaek/msbaek-claude-pluginsWrote 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/msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins/introduce-parameter-object)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins/introduce-parameter-object"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins/introduce-parameter-object/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/msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins/introduce-parameter-object"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins/introduce-parameter-object.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 | $0.00111 | $0.02768 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.01107 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00554 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00277 |
Grade A, and why
introduce-parameter-object 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 1mo 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 — 294 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Introduce Parameter Object / Preserve Whole Object
상황에 따라 두 가지 기법 중 적합한 것을 선택:
- Introduce Parameter Object (IPO): 파라미터에 행위를 추가해야 할 때 → 새 객체 생성 → 행위 이동 → Value Object 발견
- Preserve Whole Object (PWO): 기존 객체에서 값을 꺼내 전달할 때 → 객체 자체를 전달하여 파라미터 수 감소
GOAL
- 성공 = 반복 파라미터가 IPO 또는 PWO로 정리되어 커밋 완료됨
- IPO: 파라미터 그룹이 Parameter Object로 치환되고 관련 행위가 이동됨
- PWO: 객체에서 꺼낸 값들이 객체 자체 전달로 대체됨
- 사용자 확인 후 적용
- 모든 테스트 통과
기법 선택 기준
| 상황 | 적용 기법 | 이유 |
|---|---|---|
| 파라미터들이 이미 하나의 객체에서 꺼내져 전달됨 | Preserve Whole Object | 객체가 이미 존재 — 꺼내지 말고 그대로 전달 |
| 파라미터에 대한 행위를 추가해야 하는 경우 | Introduce Parameter Object | 새 객체 생성 → 행위 이동 → Value Object 발견 |
IPO의 진짜 목적
"더 큰 혜택은 파라미터 그룹에 대해서 동작하는 행위들을 파라미터 객체로 이동시킬 수 있는 것" — Fowler, Ch10
IPO는 파라미터 묶기 자체가 목적이 아니라, Value Object를 발견하는 시작점:
Introduce Parameter Object
→ Move Instance Method (관련 로직을 Parameter Object로 이동)
→ Value Object 탄생 (데이터 + 행위를 가진 객체)
적용하면 안 되는 경우
| 상황 | 이유 |
|---|---|
| 파라미터 간에 논리적 관계가 없음 | 논리 관계 없이 그룹화하면 의미 없는 객체가 생성됨 |
| 한 메서드에서만 사용되는 파라미터 조합 | 반복이 없으면 추상화의 가치 없음 |
| 파라미터 객체에 이동할 행위가 없음 | 단순 DTO가 되어 Anemic Domain Model 유발 (이 경우 PWO가 더 적합할 수 있음) |
CONSTRAINTS
- 계열: System-wide — 후보 제시 후 승인 받고 적용 (
../../references/refactoring-procedure.md§0·§3-B)
Hard Rules
- 동작 변경 금지 — 구조 개선만 수행
- 테스트 수정 금지 — 구조 변경이 테스트를 실패시키면 되돌리기
- 사용자 확인 없이 리팩토링 금지 — 모든 후보는 사용자 승인 후 실행
- 커밋 단위 — 1파일 x 1기법 = 1커밋 (논리적으로 연결된 파일은 함께)
- git add -A 금지 — 변경된 파일만 명시적으로 추가
적용 패턴
Introduce Parameter Object 리팩토링 단계:
-
반복 파라미터 그룹 식별
- 3개 이상의 파라미터가 함께 전달되는 패턴
- 2곳 이상에서 동일한 파라미터 조합 반복
-
Parameter Object 클래스 생성
- 논리적으로 관련된 파라미터를 하나의 클래스로
- record 또는 immutable class 사용 (Java 14+)
- 의미 있는 이름 부여
-
메서드 시그니처 변경
- 개별 파라미터를 Parameter Object로 치환
- 호출자 코드 업데이트
-
관련 동작 이동 (선택적)
- Parameter Object와 관련된 로직을 객체 내부로 이동
- Value Object로 발전 가능
Before/After 예시
// Before: 반복되는 파라미터 그룹
public class PriceService {
public void processPrice(int originalPrice, int discountedPrice, String currency) {
// 처리 로직
validatePrice(originalPrice, discountedPrice, currency);
formatPrice(originalPrice, discountedPrice, currency);
}
private void validatePrice(int originalPrice, int discountedPrice, String currency) {
if (originalPrice < 0 || discountedPrice < 0) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Price cannot be negative");
}
if (discountedPrice > originalPrice) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Discounted price cannot exceed original");
}
}
private String formatPrice(int originalPrice, int discountedPrice, String currency) {
double discount = (originalPrice - discountedPrice) * 100.0 / originalPrice;
return String.format("%s %.0f%% off: %d -> %d",
currency, discount, originalPrice, discountedPrice);
}
}
// After: Parameter Object 적용
record Price(int original, int discounted, String currency) {
// 생성자에서 검증
public Price {
if (original < 0 || discounted < 0) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Price cannot be negative");
}
if (discounted > original) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Discounted price cannot exceed original");
}
}
// 관련 동작을 객체 내부로 이동
public double discountPercentage() {
return (original - discounted) * 100.0 / original;
}
public String formatted() {
return String.format("%s %.0f%% off: %d -> %d",
currency, discountPercentage(), original, discounted);
}
}
public class PriceService {
public void processPrice(Price price) {
// Parameter Object 하나만 전달
// 검증은 Price 생성자에서 자동 수행
String formatted = price.formatted();
}
}
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines · +64 tokens per session afdcf997e39c
- 1mo ago Changed 92e228b4ce18
- 1mo ago First seen · 293 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A b645e699bff4
introduce-parameter-object is a skill published in the GitHub repository msbaek/msbaek-claude-plugins (8 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 111 tokens to every session and 2,768 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
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"…
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…
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…