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 SebaBoler/vanguard --skill simplifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SebaBoler/vanguardWrote 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/sebaboler/vanguard/simplify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sebaboler/vanguard/simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sebaboler/vanguard/simplify/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/sebaboler/vanguard/simplify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sebaboler/vanguard/simplify.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00229 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00092 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00046 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
simplify 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.
What it actually says
Simplify
Improve the quality of the changed code without changing what it does. Review the diff on four angles and apply the fixes.
- Reuse: does the new code re-implement something the codebase already has? Call the existing helper instead of duplicating it.
- Simplification: remove redundant or derivable state, copy-paste with slight variation, deep nesting, and dead code left behind. Prefer the simplest form that does the same job.
- Efficiency: remove wasted work — redundant computation, repeated I/O, sequential calls that could run together — when it does not hurt clarity.
- Altitude: is each change at the right depth, or a fragile special-case bolted onto shared infrastructure? Prefer generalizing the underlying mechanism over stacking special cases.
Skip any change that would alter behavior or reach well outside the diff. Finish by stating what you simplified.
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 First seen · 22 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 36ad1b0016e8
simplify is a skill published in the GitHub repository SebaBoler/vanguard (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 229 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
review
Review one pull request for real bugs, regressions, and convention violations. Enumerate candidate issues across the whole diff, verify each against the code, then return structured line-anchored findings and a verdict. Read-only on GitHub; the orchestrator posts the review.
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…
node-modules-inspector
Inspects a project's installed nodemodules and produces three reports: duplicated packages (installed in multiple versions), packages sorted by install size, and maintenance actions (dep-upgrade opportunities + publint findings, grouped by consumer/author). Use when the user wants to audit dependencies, find duplicate…
audit-performance
Audit and prioritize performance work through bounded-work and forward-progress checks. Use when asked to find performance issues, investigate freezes/500s/OOMs, review retries or polling for no-progress loops, rank a performance backlog, or implement the next simple performance fixes.
establishing-code-ownership
Determine which PostHog team owns a file, directory, or code path, or enumerate all code a team owns (via distributed owners.yaml, products//product.yaml, and .github/CODEOWNERS). Use when assigning a reviewer, attributing a bug or slow query to a team, routing work, scoping a team-wide audit, or answering "who owns…
extending-hobby-smoke-tests
Design, extend, review, or debug PostHog Hobby end-to-end smoke tests in bin/hobby-ci.py and .github/workflows/ci-hobby.yml. Use when adding an ingestion round trip, deciding whether a product belongs in Hobby CI, changing the CI Hobby service topology or API-key scopes, or diagnosing a smoke test that captures data…