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 pedroiff0/awesome-skills --skill simplify-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pedroiff0/awesome-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/pedroiff0/awesome-skills/simplify-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedroiff0/awesome-skills/simplify-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedroiff0/awesome-skills/simplify-code.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00014 | $0.02537 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.01269 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00507 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00254 |
Grade A, and why
simplify-code 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 3d 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
100% identical to simplify-code — 0 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 — 213 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Simplify Code — Parallel Review & Cleanup
Review your recent code changes with three focused reviewers running in parallel, aggregate their findings, and apply the fixes worth applying.
Core principle: Three narrow reviewers beat one broad reviewer. Each one deeply searches the codebase for a single class of problem — reuse, quality, efficiency — without diluting its attention across all three. They run concurrently, so you pay the latency of one review, not three.
When to Use
Trigger this skill when the user says any of:
- "simplify" / "simplify my changes" / "simplify these changes"
- "review my code" / "review my recent changes" / "clean up my changes"
- "/simplify" (if they're carrying the Claude Code habit over)
Optional modifiers the user may add — honor them:
- Focus: "simplify focus on efficiency" → run only the efficiency reviewer
(or weight the aggregation toward it). Recognized focuses:
reuse,quality,efficiency. - Dry run: "simplify but don't change anything" / "just report" → run the three reviewers, present findings, apply NOTHING. Ask before applying.
- Scope: "simplify the last commit" / "simplify staged" / "simplify src/foo.py" → narrow the diff source accordingly (see Phase 1).
Do NOT auto-run this after every edit. It costs three subagents' worth of tokens — invoke it only when the user explicitly asks.
The Process
Phase 1 — Identify the changes
Capture the diff to review. Pick the source by what the user asked for, in this default order:
# 1. Default: uncommitted working-tree changes (tracked files)
git diff
# 2. If that's empty, include staged changes
git diff HEAD
# 3. Scoped variants the user may request:
git diff --staged # "staged changes"
git diff HEAD~1 # "the last commit"
git diff main...HEAD # "this branch" / "my PR"
git diff -- src/foo.py # specific file(s)
If git diff and git diff HEAD are both empty and there's no git repo or no
changes, fall back to the files the user explicitly named or that were
recently created/edited in this session. If you genuinely can't find any
changed code, say so and stop — there's nothing to simplify.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 213 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 5549142eb234
simplify-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository pedroiff0/awesome-skills (1 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 2,537 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to simplify-code, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-reviewer
Reviews a Git branch as a pull request against the base branch (auto-resolved from origin/HEAD — usually main or master) using this repo's own rules — the CLAUDE.md constitution and the .claude/skills/ that apply to the changed files. Fetches the branch, switches to it, diffs it against the merge-base, routes the…
ac-qa-gh-pr-review
Reviews pull requests through a bounded shared worker-wave review flow, consolidated reporting, and user-confirmed gh pr review actions.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
cross-model-review
A second-opinion code review that asks a different AI model to independently inspect a change, then compares both reviews. It focuses on logic, security, consistency, and omissions.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
code-quality
Drive static-analysis code quality in pi-agent-dashboard with Biome (analyze → fix → test), in changed-files or whole-repo mode. Use when asked to "improve code quality", "lint and fix", "clean up warnings", "fix Biome issues", "run static analysis", or when setting a code-quality goal. Skip for one-line edits.