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 PaulRBerg/agent-skills --skill naming-refactorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PaulRBerg/agent-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/paulrberg/agent-skills/naming-refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/paulrberg/agent-skills/naming-refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paulrberg/agent-skills/naming-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/paulrberg/agent-skills/naming-refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paulrberg/agent-skills/naming-refactor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- 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 | $0.00020 | $0.02167 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01084 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00433 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00217 |
Grade A, and why
naming-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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Naming Refactor
If these instructions are already present in the conversation from a slash or dollar invocation, follow them directly; do not invoke this skill again through a skill tool.
Make every name in the current repository communicate one coherent domain model, regardless of refactor cost.
Contract
- Cover the complete current Git repository. Do not narrow the run to selected files or stop after a candidate cap.
- Preserve features, runtime behavior, side effects, performance-sensitive characteristics, and externally consumed contracts. Large diffs, path moves, and repository-controlled interface migrations are allowed.
- Treat an exported surface as repository-controlled only when every consumer is in scope and can migrate atomically. Preserve other API names, CLI flags, environment variables, configuration keys, wire fields, routes, database names, and import paths unless the user explicitly authorizes a breaking migration.
- Fix a bug discovered during the refactor only when the defect and intended behavior are clear and a regression check can prove the fix. Keep bug fixes in a distinct change wave and report them separately.
- Preserve pre-existing work. Local edits, file moves, directory restructuring, and non-destructive validation are authorized. Do not commit, push, publish, or write externally unless the user or repository instructions require it.
- Serialize implementation and verification against intersecting repository writes. Complete codebase analysis and the refactor plan first, then acquire a coordination scope covering the complete worktree before the first edit. If no reliable coordination mechanism is available, require the user to confirm an exclusive write window instead.
- A verified no-op is valid only after exhaustive coverage. Do not rename a clear, conventional name merely to create churn, but do not retain a weak name to minimize diff size.
Coverage Ledger
Resolve scripts/naming-ledger.py relative to this SKILL.md and create its ledger outside the repository:
What ships with it
2 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 · 168 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 8b18b98d8588
naming-refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository PaulRBerg/agent-skills (70 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 2,167 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…