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 sliamh11/Deus --skill improve-codebase-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sliamh11/DeusWrote 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/sliamh11/deus/improve-codebase-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sliamh11/deus/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sliamh11/deus/improve-codebase-architecture/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/sliamh11/deus/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sliamh11/deus/improve-codebase-architecture.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01209 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00605 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00242 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00121 |
Grade A, and why
improve-codebase-architecture 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 6d 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
81% identical to improve-codebase-architecture — 42 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 — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Improve Codebase Architecture
Surface architectural friction and propose deepening opportunities — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
This command is informed by the project's domain model and built on a shared design vocabulary:
- Run the
/codebase-designskill for the architecture vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion — don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." - The domain language in
CONTEXT.mdgives names to good seams; ADRs indocs/adr/record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
Process
1. Explore
Read the project's domain glossary (CONTEXT.md) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
Then use the Agent tool with subagent_type=Explore to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
- Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small modules?
- Where are modules shallow — interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
- Where have pure functions been extracted just for testability, but the real bugs hide in how they're called (no locality)?
- Where do tightly-coupled modules leak across their seams?
- Which parts of the codebase are untested, or hard to test through their current interface?
Apply the deletion test to anything you suspect is shallow: would deleting it concentrate complexity, or just move it? A "yes, concentrates" is the signal you want.
2. Present candidates as an HTML report
Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from $TMPDIR, falling back to /tmp (or %TEMP% on Windows), and write to <tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user — xdg-open <path> on Linux, open <path> on macOS, start <path> on Windows — and tell them the absolute path.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 68 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 746d633d8099
improve-codebase-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository sliamh11/Deus (51 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,209 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 81% identical to improve-codebase-architecture, differing in 42 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-comment-evaluator
Use to judge whether a PR review comment sounds polite.
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
red-team-review
Unified adversarial review: v4.3 Strategic Matrix (MTA-004). 7-phase framework: Priors → Rubric → Adversarial Lenses → SWOT/TOWS → MCDA Decision Engine → Blind Spot/Kill Switch → Executive Summary. Absorbs: bias-detector.
code-audit
Use when the user says '/code-audit', 'audit this code', 'check code quality', 'find duplication', 'find dead code', 'code cleanup', 'technical debt audit', 'code review module', or wants a structured noetic investigation of code quality. This skill runs external analysis tools and structured manual review, producing…
openclaw-github-dedupe
Investigate a cluster of GitHub issues and PRs, determine canonical candidates, post duplicate/related status, preserve contributor credit, and execute cleanup actions. Supports autonomous mode for provided-link-only closeout, merge/fix follow-through, changelog, and post-merge issue/PR cleanup.
pr
Analyze changes, detect scope issues, and create a well-structured PR.