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 willdady/platypus --skill improve-codebase-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/willdady/platypusWrote 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/willdady/platypus/improve-codebase-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/willdady/platypus/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/willdady/platypus/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/willdady/platypus/improve-codebase-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/willdady/platypus/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 | $0.01349 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00540 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00135 |
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 10d 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
92% identical to improve-codebase-architecture — 0 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 — 72 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:
- Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" 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, and don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
- The domain language in
GLOSSARY.mdgives names to good seams; ADRs indocs/adr/record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
Process
1. Explore
Scope before you scan: YAGNI. Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide where to look before you look:
- If the user named a direction (a module, a subsystem, a pain point), take it, and skip the inference below.
- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (
git log --oneline) to find the codebase's hot spots, the files and areas that keep coming up, and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
Read the project's domain glossary (GLOSSARY.md) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
Then spawn a sub-agent 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, with an 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?
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 10d ago Changed 552240a5ab5c
- 1mo ago First seen · 72 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 7b76f01b0eef
improve-codebase-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository willdady/platypus (120 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,349 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to improve-codebase-architecture, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
community-research-insight
Extract structured insight briefs from community research transcripts or notes. Produces pain points, stakeholder needs, opportunity maps, risks, and follow-up questions. Requires human review before publication.
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.
openclaw-pr-batch-sweep
Select, review, repair, validate, and land batches of up to 20 low-risk OpenClaw contributor pull requests using Vincent's maintainer preferences and bounded sub-agent lanes. Use for "next 20", broad contributor PR sweeps, merge-candidate mining, or continued PR-batch work where drafts, maintainer work, trivial…
semantic-slicing
Build local semantic review slices by combining clawpatch feature maps, deepsec threat candidates, visual review maps, and optional gitcrawl/discrawl evidence for repos such as openclaw/openclaw.
github-code-review
Review code changes by analyzing git diffs, leaving inline comments on PRs, and performing thorough pre-push review. Works with gh CLI or falls back to git + GitHub REST API via curl.
gh-address-comments
This skill should be used when addressing GitHub pull request review comments systematically with mandatory resolution tracking. Use when user says "address PR comments", "fix review feedback", "handle PR review", "resolve PR threads", or needs to ensure all review comments are addressed before merging. Fetches…