> reducing-entropy
Manual-only skill for minimizing total codebase size. Only activate when explicitly requested by user. Measures success by final code amount, not effort. Bias toward deletion.
curl "https://skillshub.wtf/softaworks/agent-toolkit/reducing-entropy?format=md"Reducing Entropy
More code begets more code. Entropy accumulates. This skill biases toward the smallest possible codebase.
Core question: "What does the codebase look like after?"
Before You Begin
Load at least one mindset from references/
- List the files in the reference directory
- Read frontmatter descriptions to pick which applies
- Load at least one
- State which you loaded and its core principle
Do not proceed until you've done this.
The Goal
The goal is less total code in the final codebase - not less code to write right now.
- Writing 50 lines that delete 200 lines = net win
- Keeping 14 functions to avoid writing 2 = net loss
- "No churn" is not a goal. Less code is the goal.
Measure the end state, not the effort.
Three Questions
1. What's the smallest codebase that solves this?
Not "what's the smallest change" - what's the smallest result.
- Could this be 2 functions instead of 14?
- Could this be 0 functions (delete the feature)?
- What would we delete if we did this?
2. Does the proposed change result in less total code?
Count lines before and after. If after > before, reject it.
- "Better organized" but more code = more entropy
- "More flexible" but more code = more entropy
- "Cleaner separation" but more code = more entropy
3. What can we delete?
Every change is an opportunity to delete. Ask:
- What does this make obsolete?
- What was only needed because of what we're replacing?
- What's the maximum we could remove?
Red Flags
- "Keep what exists" - Status quo bias. The question is total code, not churn.
- "This adds flexibility" - Flexibility for what? YAGNI.
- "Better separation of concerns" - More files/functions = more code. Separation isn't free.
- "Type safety" - Worth how many lines? Sometimes runtime checks in less code wins.
- "Easier to understand" - 14 things are not easier than 2 things.
When This Doesn't Apply
- The codebase is already minimal for what it does
- You're in a framework with strong conventions (don't fight it)
- Regulatory/compliance requirements mandate certain structures
Reference Mindsets
See references/ for philosophical grounding.
To add new mindsets, see adding-reference-mindsets.md.
Bias toward deletion. Measure the end state.
> related_skills --same-repo
> jira
Use when the user mentions Jira issues (e.g., "PROJ-123"), asks about tickets, wants to create/view/update issues, check sprint status, or manage their Jira workflow. Triggers on keywords like "jira", "issue", "ticket", "sprint", "backlog", or issue key patterns.
> humanizer
Remove signs of AI-generated writing from text. Use when editing or reviewing text to make it sound more natural and human-written. Based on Wikipedia's comprehensive "Signs of AI writing" guide. Detects and fixes patterns including: inflated symbolism, promotional language, superficial -ing analyses, vague attributions, em dash overuse, rule of three, AI vocabulary words, negative parallelisms, and excessive conjunctive phrases. Credits: Original skill by @blader - https://github.com/blader/hu
> gemini
Use when the user asks to run Gemini CLI for code review, plan review, or big context (>200k) processing. Ideal for comprehensive analysis requiring large context windows. Uses Gemini 3 Pro by default for state-of-the-art reasoning and coding.
> excalidraw
Use when working with *.excalidraw or *.excalidraw.json files, user mentions diagrams/flowcharts, or requests architecture visualization - delegates all Excalidraw operations to subagents to prevent context exhaustion from verbose JSON (single files: 4k-22k tokens, can exceed read limits)