Continuous-Claude-v3 is a Claude Code development environment that preserves working context between sessions, coordinates specialized agents, and stores project knowledge through ledgers, handoffs, and analysis tools. It is for people using Claude Code on ongoing or complex software work. Its catalogue entries are the skills, agents, hooks, plugin, and setting that provide its workflows and orchestration.
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 parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 --skill refactorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3Wrote 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/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/refactor/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/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/refactor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk fail
- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00017 | $0.01160 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00580 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00232 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00116 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 — 205 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/refactor - Refactoring Workflow
Safe refactoring with review gates.
When to Use
- "Refactor X"
- "Clean up this code"
- "Extract this into a module"
- "Improve the architecture of Y"
- Large-scale code restructuring
- Technical debt reduction
Workflow Overview
┌──────────┐ ┌────────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ phoenix │───▶│ plan- │───▶│ kraken │───▶│plan-reviewer│───▶│ arbiter │
│ │ │ agent │ │ │ │ │ │ │
└──────────┘ └────────────┘ └──────────┘ └──────────┘ └───────────┘
Analyze Plan Implement Review Verify
current changes refactor changes tests pass
Agent Sequence
| # | Agent | Role | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | phoenix | Analyze current code, identify improvement areas | Analysis report |
| 2 | plan-agent | Create safe refactoring plan | Step-by-step plan |
| 3 | kraken | Implement the refactoring | Code changes |
| 4 | plan-reviewer | Review changes for correctness | Review report |
| 5 | arbiter | Verify all tests still pass | Test report |
Refactoring Principles
- Tests first: Ensure adequate test coverage before refactoring
- Small steps: Each change should be independently verifiable
- Behavior preserved: No functional changes during refactor
- Reviewable: Changes should be easy to review
Execution
Phase 1: Analyze
Task(
subagent_type="phoenix",
prompt="""
Analyze for refactoring: [TARGET_CODE]
Identify:
- Current pain points
- Code smells
- Improvement opportunities
- Risk areas
- Test coverage gaps
"""
)
Phase 2: Plan
Task(
subagent_type="plan-agent",
prompt="""
Plan refactoring: [TARGET_CODE]
Analysis: [from phoenix]
Create:
- Step-by-step refactoring plan
- Each step should be:
- Small and focused
- Independently testable
- Reversible
- Identify files affected
- Risk mitigation strategy
"""
)
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 · 205 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A af9428c62f0c
refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 (3,938 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,160 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
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…
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
review
Enter the Review phase of CocoBrew. Aggregates findings from Code Quality Advisor, CocoCupper intelligence, spec compliance check, and decision coverage gate. Produces review.md with decision points. Requires developer approval before $ship can proceed.
ln-21-documentation-auditor
Audits documentation and comments for trustworthy claims, coverage, and discoverability. Not for code, test, or architecture audits.
ln-41-test-strategy-planner
Plans a risk-based test portfolio and prioritized scenarios without editing tests. Not for test execution or implementation.
ln-42-acceptance-test-builder
Builds, updates, consolidates, or retires scoped acceptance tests and records execution evidence. Not for product-code fixes or audits.