Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to varandrew/moor. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/varandrew/moor/main/.agents/skills/gitnexus-refactoring/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/varandrew/moorWrote 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/varandrew/moor/gitnexus-refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/varandrew/moor/gitnexus-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/varandrew/moor/gitnexus-refactoring/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/varandrew/moor/gitnexus-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/varandrew/moor/gitnexus-refactoring.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 | $0.00053 | $0.01548 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00619 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00310 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00155 |
Grade A, and why
gitnexus-refactoring 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 20d 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- gitnexus-refactoring — 100% identical, 14 lines differ
- gitnexus-refactoring — 100% identical, 14 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactoring with GitNexus
When to Use
- "Rename this function safely"
- "Extract this into a module"
- "Split this service"
- "Move this to a new file"
- Any task involving renaming, extracting, splitting, or restructuring code
Bind the repository first
Refactoring writes to disk. rename with dry_run: false edits files in
whichever repository was resolved, so binding identity here is a safety gate,
not bookkeeping.
Call list_repos {} before the first tool call. With one indexed repository,
use the examples below as written. With more than one, pass repo on every
call: an omitted repo normally errors, but under an MCP policy with a
configured default it resolves to that default silently. If you cannot tell
which repository is meant, stop and ask. Never run rename with
dry_run: false until the preview in the same bound repository has been
reviewed — its returned file_path values show which checkout is about to be
written, so read them as a confirmation of identity.
list_repos is paginated, so page with offset: pagination.nextOffset until
hasMore is false before concluding a repository is absent.
detect_changes takes worktree when you are editing a linked worktree the
MCP server was not launched from; otherwise git diff runs in the wrong
checkout and reports nothing changed, which reads as a verified refactor.
Workflow
0. list_repos {} → Bind repo (and worktree)
1. impact({target: "X", direction: "upstream"}) → Map all dependents
2. query({search_query: "X"}) → Find execution flows involving X
3. context({name: "X"}) → See all incoming/outgoing refs
4. Plan update order: interfaces → implementations → callers → tests
If "Index is stale" → run
node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyzein terminal.
Checklists
Rename Symbol
- [ ] list_repos {} — bind repo; explicit repo when >1 indexed, ask if ambiguous
- [ ] rename({symbol_name: "oldName", new_name: "newName", dry_run: true}) — preview all edits
- [ ] Confirm the previewed file paths are in the bound repository/worktree
- [ ] Review graph edits (high confidence) and text_search edits (review carefully)
- [ ] If satisfied: rename({..., dry_run: false}) — apply edits
- [ ] detect_changes() — verify only expected files changed
- [ ] Run tests for affected processes
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.
- 20d ago First seen · 165 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 97054ccaad86
gitnexus-refactoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository varandrew/moor (163 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,548 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-09.
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"…
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…
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…
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…