Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add signalcompose/claude-tools/plugin install codeWrote 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/signalcompose/claude-tools/refactor-team)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/signalcompose/claude-tools/refactor-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/signalcompose/claude-tools/refactor-team/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/signalcompose/claude-tools/refactor-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/signalcompose/claude-tools/refactor-team.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 | $0.00049 | $0.00761 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00304 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00152 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00076 |
Grade C, and why
refactor-team scanned grade C with 1 finding 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.
Recursive force deletehighDestructive command
rm -rf with a variable or a broad path is one typo away from removing the wrong tree.
rm -rf ~/.claude/teams/<team-name>/ ~/.claude/tasks/<team-name>/ How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 89 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor Team
Step 1: Identify Target Files & Detect Context
Resolve target files:
- If user specified path: use that
- Otherwise:
git diff --name-only <base-branch>for changed files
Detect context:
- Base branch:
git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|refs/remotes/origin/||'(fallback:main) - Test command: detect from
package.json,Makefile,pytest.ini, etc. - Project rules: read project's CLAUDE.md if present
Step 2: Create Refactor Team
MANDATORY: Use TeamCreate to create the team, then spawn agents with Task tool.
Team structure:
Team Lead (yourself)
├─ Analyzer: pr-review-toolkit:code-simplifier
└─ Refactorer: general-purpose (refactorer)
MANDATORY: Always specify an explicit model parameter when spawning each agent. Choose the appropriate model based on task complexity (haiku for lightweight, sonnet for standard, opus for complex reasoning). Never omit model (default inherit may fail in parallel spawning).
Step 3: Run Analysis
Analyzer examines target files using criteria from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/refactor-team/references/analysis-criteria.md.
Analysis output format:
| # | Category | File:Line | Description | Priority | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DRY | src/a.ts:42 | ... | High | Low |
| 2 | Naming | src/c.ts:8 | ... | Medium | None |
Step 4: Present Proposals to User
MANDATORY: Present the analysis table to user and wait for approval. Do NOT proceed without explicit user selection of which items to execute.
User selects items by number (e.g., "1, 3, 5" or "all").
Step 5: Execute Approved Refactoring
For each approved item:
- Refactorer applies the change
- Run test command (detected in Step 1)
- If tests pass: commit with
refactor: <description> - If tests fail: revert and report
Rules:
- 1 refactoring = 1 commit
- No functional changes (behavior must be preserved)
- Commit prefix:
refactor:
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 89 lines · 49 tokens per session scan C a0946a6711c6
refactor-team is a skill published in the GitHub repository signalcompose/claude-tools (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 761 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (recursive force delete). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…