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 wunki/dotfiles --skill code-simplifiergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wunki/dotfilesWrote 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/wunki/dotfiles/code-simplifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wunki/dotfiles/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wunki/dotfiles/code-simplifier/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/wunki/dotfiles/code-simplifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wunki/dotfiles/code-simplifier.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 | $0.00090 | $0.00574 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00230 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00115 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00057 |
Grade A, and why
code-simplifier 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 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.
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 — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Simplifier
Refine code so it is easier to read, reason about, and maintain, while preserving all behavior.
Guardrails
- Preserve functionality. Do not change outputs, side effects, public interfaces, or user-visible behavior.
- Stay in scope. Default to the files the user named or recently modified. Ask before expanding scope.
- Discover project conventions before editing: check for
AGENTS.md, lint config, and existing code patterns in the target files. If none are found, follow the dominant style in the file. - Prefer explicit, maintainable code over clever compression.
Workflow
- Identify target files. If scope is ambiguous, ask the user to confirm which files or modules to touch before proceeding.
- Find complexity hotspots:
- Deep nesting or confusing control flow
- Duplicate or redundant logic
- Overly broad functions doing more than one thing
- Dead code, unused parameters, or unnecessary abstractions
- Simplify safely:
- Extract helpers only when the extracted unit has a clear, stable name and the call site becomes meaningfully clearer. Do not extract for extraction's sake.
- Replace deeply nested conditionals with early returns or guard clauses
- Use descriptive names for values, functions, and boolean flags
- Remove comments that only restate what the code already says
- Apply language-idiomatic patterns, not patterns borrowed from other languages
- Verify behavior is unchanged:
- Run the relevant test suite or linter for touched files if a test command is known or discoverable from
package.json,Makefile, or CI config. - If no tests exist, state that explicitly in the summary and flag it as a risk.
- If tests fail after simplification, revert the change that caused the failure before proceeding.
- Run the relevant test suite or linter for touched files if a test command is known or discoverable from
- If the code is already clean and no meaningful simplification is possible, say so explicitly. Do not manufacture changes.
- Summarize only changes that had a clear complexity payoff. Note any assumptions made about intent or scope.
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 · 48 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 829b9e6d0e56
code-simplifier is a skill published in the GitHub repository wunki/dotfiles (47 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 574 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
assess-quality
Foundational quality framework: the five questions (readable, easy to start, expands without bloat, consistent, intentional) every other dev skill is judged against, plus the dual-audience and workshop principles. Use when onboarding to a project, defining a quality bar, setting an assessment checklist, or arbitrating…
merge-ready
Drive an existing pull request to a mergeable state: get CI green, resolve merge conflicts with the base branch, address and resolve review comments, trigger required bot reviews/approvals (e.g. commenting '@claude review'), link associated issues, and clean up the PR title and description. Ends with a readiness…
check-project
Validate project structure against scaffold conventions -- check for required files, CI consistency, documentation completeness, sub-package/workspace members, and optional directory usage, reporting PASS/WARN/FAIL with fix suggestions. Use to audit an existing project or verify a scaffold was applied correctly. Do…
review-diff
Standardized review of the CURRENT working-tree changes -- staged, unstaged, and untracked -- against an explicit five-dimension rubric (correctness, security, tests, scope-creep, conventions). Emits a prioritized findings list, each with file:line, severity, and a suggested fix. Read-only: it reviews and reports, it…
sync-ecosystem
Audit one repository against ecosystem conventions (naming, capabilities, terminology, doc coverage, version discipline, canonical skill coverage) and emit a read-only drift report. Use when onboarding a repo, auditing convention drift, or checking ecosystem consistency after a refactor. This skill only reports; it…
review-design
Pragmatic Programmer principles: DRY, orthogonality, ETC, reversibility, tracer bullets, design by contract, decoupling/Law of Demeter, pragmatic paranoia. The 'why' layer between assess-quality (framework) and write-code (operational). Use when reasoning about design tradeoffs, coupling, or whether a decision is…