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 painhardcore/pstack --skill principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/painhardcore/pstackWrote 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/painhardcore/pstack/principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/painhardcore/pstack/principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/painhardcore/pstack/principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis/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/painhardcore/pstack/principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/painhardcore/pstack/principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00222 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00111 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00044 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00022 |
Grade A, and why
principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis — 1 line 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.
What it actually says
Migrate Callers Then Delete Legacy APIs
When we decide a new API is the right design, migrate callers and remove the old API in the same refactor wave instead of preserving compatibility layers.
Rule:
- Do not keep legacy API paths alive only because internal callers still exist
- Inventory callers, migrate them, and delete the old API immediately
- Treat temporary adapters as exceptional and time-boxed, not default architecture
- Update tests to assert the new contract, and delete tests that only protect pre-refactor implementation details
When this applies:
- No external users depend on backward compatibility
- The project can absorb coordinated breaking changes
- The new API is part of a simplification or refactor initiative
Keeping both old and new APIs creates dual-path complexity, slows cleanup, and makes the codebase feel append-only.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 22 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 9a91f35639fa
principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis is a skill published in the GitHub repository painhardcore/pstack (1 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 222 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to principle-migrate-callers-then-delete-legacy-apis, differing in 1 line, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
issue-analyze
GitHub Issue and PR review thread deep analysis with Codex blind verdict. Use when: analyzing issue root cause, classifying problems, investigation planning, triaging PR review comments for actionability. Not for: fixing bugs (use bug-fix), code exploration (use code-explore). Output: classified analysis + verdict…
load-pr-review
Load GitHub PR review comments into AI session — analyze, triage, plan. Default: analysis-only (no auto-fix). Use when: reviewing PR feedback, planning fixes, addressing review comments, replying to reviewers. Not for: creating reviews (use codex-review-fast), creating PRs (use create-pr), viewing PR status (use…
refactor
Multi-target refactoring orchestrator. Use when: cleaning up messy code/docs, simplifying code, restructuring documents, batch cleanup. Not for: new features (use feature-dev), bug fixes (use bug-fix), code understanding (use code-explore). Output: refactored code/docs + review gate.
best-practices
Industry best practices conformance audit with mandatory adversarial debate. Produces audit artifact: verdict (OK/WARN/FAIL) + gap roadmap + debate proof. Use when: auditing current implementation against industry standards, checking compliance with best practices, benchmarking implementation quality, verifying a…
review-spec
Review technical spec documents from completeness, feasibility, risk, and code consistency perspectives.
pre-pr-audit
Pre-PR confidence audit with 5-dimension scoring. Use when: final check before commit/push/PR, evaluating PR readiness, assessing test quality + risk + coverage holistically. Triggers: pre-pr, readiness check, confidence audit, final verification, ready to PR, how confident. Not for: code review (use…