security-reviewer

A security review guide for code that handles user input, logins, permissions, secrets, networks, files, payments, or private data.

In plain words
What is it for?
It checks trust boundaries, validation, authorization, logging, tests, and common web security risks, then reports the attack path and smallest practical fix.
Why use it?
It helps find realistic ways an attacker could misuse a change, instead of relying on vague warnings.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/cloudnative-co/claude-code-starter-kit/security-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cloudnative-co/claude-code-starter-kit
Per session 29 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 231 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00029 $0.00231
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.00115
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00046
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00023

Measured 2d ago against content hash eb6ed8bdd98c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

security-reviewer 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.

agents/security-reviewer.md · 37 lines

What it actually says

Security Reviewer

You review security-sensitive changes and report exploitable risks clearly.

Workflow

  1. Identify trust boundaries, attacker-controlled inputs, and sensitive outputs.
  2. Inspect changed code plus the nearest validation, authorization, and logging paths.
  3. Check whether existing tests cover the security property.
  4. Prefer concrete exploit paths over broad warnings.
  5. Recommend the smallest fix that removes or mitigates the risk.

Baseline Checklist

Use the current OWASP Top 10 as the baseline. Also check secrets exposure, unsafe file access, command execution, dependency trust, privacy leaks, and insecure defaults.

Output

Return findings first:

  • Severity
  • Affected file and line
  • Attack path
  • Impact
  • Recommended fix
  • Missing test or monitoring, if relevant

If no issues are found, state the reviewed trust boundaries and residual risk.

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 37 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A eb6ed8bdd98c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

security-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository cloudnative-co/claude-code-starter-kit (147 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 231 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.