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 agentmods add skills/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/refactornpx skills add viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit --skill refactorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kitWhat 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 | $0.00039 | $0.00696 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00348 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00139 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
refactor 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 2d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Safe Code Refactoring
Context
!git status --short 2>/dev/null
!git stash list 2>/dev/null
Refactoring Process
Step 1: Analyze — Identify Code Smells
Read the target code and identify issues from this list:
- Long Method/Function (>40 lines): Extract smaller, focused functions
- Deep Nesting (>3 levels): Use early returns, guard clauses, or extract methods
- Code Duplication: Extract shared logic into reusable functions
- God Class/Module: Split into focused, single-responsibility modules
- Feature Envy: Move logic to the class/module that owns the data
- Primitive Obsession: Replace related primitives with a proper type/struct/class
- Long Parameter List (>4 params): Use an options/config object or builder pattern
- Dead Code: Remove unused functions, imports, variables, and commented-out code
- Magic Numbers/Strings: Extract into named constants
- Inconsistent Naming: Align with project conventions
- Missing Abstractions: Introduce interfaces/traits where concrete types are overused
- Tight Coupling: Introduce dependency injection or interface boundaries
Step 2: Plan — Define the Refactoring Strategy
For each identified issue:
- Name the specific refactoring technique (Extract Method, Move Function, Introduce Parameter Object, etc.)
- Describe the before and after state
- Assess the risk (High/Medium/Low) — does it touch public API? Does it cross module boundaries?
- List affected files
Present the plan to the user before executing.
Step 3: Verify — Check for Existing Tests
- Find all tests that cover the code being refactored
- Run them to establish a green baseline
- If no tests exist, flag this as a risk and recommend writing tests first
Step 4: Execute — Apply Changes
- Make one refactoring change at a time
- After each change, verify:
- The code still compiles/parses
- Existing tests still pass
- No new linting errors
- If a change breaks something, revert it immediately
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 70 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A abfce5b12609
refactor is a skill published in the GitHub repository viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit (7 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 696 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
feishu
Work with Feishu or Lark bots, docs, sheets, bitables, approval flows, and OpenAPI/MCP setup without hardcoding credentials.
interview
Ask one useful structured question at a time only when material product/implementation choices are genuinely missing; remember answers and produce a brief/spec. Discoverable facts should be investigated instead of asked.
security-review
Review trust boundaries, auth/authz, injection, secrets, filesystem/network exposure, dependencies, and exploitability without pretending a shallow lint is an audit.
ppt-review
Read this skill only after current officereview structural output and relevant rendered images exist. Do not use source code, a tool success flag, or the first-slide preview as a substitute for deck evidence.
ui-design-contract
Use this skill before rendering when the direction must persist across multiple screens/components, brand or system work, conflicting references, formal handoff, or a genuinely vague visual system. Ordinary single-screen screenshots and clear briefs use ui-design-executor's compact source/visual thesis instead of…
helmor-debug-operate
Operate, reproduce, and debug a running local Helmor desktop development build through the Tauri MCP bridge. Use when the user asks to use Tauri MCP, towery MCP, the local dev build, the Tauri webview, visual end-to-end validation, UI automation, screenshots, DOM/accessibility snapshots, IPC or log tracing…