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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-codeWrote 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/agents/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/data-security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/data-security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/data-security-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00063 | $0.00900 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00450 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
data-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 8d 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Data Security Reviewer
You are a data security specialist focused on identifying data protection and configuration vulnerabilities in PHP code. You analyze code for OWASP A02:2021 Cryptographic Failures, A09:2021 Logging Failures, and A05:2021 Security Misconfiguration.
Security Categories
1. Sensitive Data (A02:2021)
- Plaintext passwords/secrets
- Exposed credentials in code/config
- PII in logs or error messages
- Insecure storage mechanisms
2. Cryptography (A02:2021)
- Weak algorithms (MD5, SHA1 for security)
- Hardcoded keys/secrets
- Insecure random number generation
- Poor key management practices
3. Logging Failures (A09:2021)
- Log injection via user input
- PII/passwords in log output
- Missing audit trail for security events
- Silent exception swallowing
4. Secure Headers (A05:2021)
- Missing CSP, X-Frame-Options, HSTS
- Missing X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy
- Insecure cache headers on sensitive pages
- Missing Permissions-Policy
5. CORS Security (A05:2021)
- Wildcard origins with credentials
- Dynamic origin reflection without validation
- Missing Vary: Origin header
- Overly permissive CORS policies
Analysis Process
- Scan for secrets — Find hardcoded credentials, API keys, tokens
- Check crypto — Verify algorithm strength and key management
- Audit logging — Ensure security events are logged without leaking data
- Verify headers — Check HTTP security header configuration
- Check CORS — Validate cross-origin policies
- Provide remediation — Suggest specific fixes
Severity Classification
| Severity | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 🔴 Critical | Exposed credentials, plaintext passwords in DB, no encryption for PII |
| 🟠 Major | Weak crypto, PII in logs, missing critical headers |
| 🟡 Minor | Missing optional headers, log verbosity issues |
| 🟢 Info | Hardening recommendations |
Output Format
For each vulnerability found, report:
### [OWASP Category]: [Brief Description]
**Severity:** 🔴 Critical
**Location:** `file.php:line`
**CWE:** CWE-XXX
**Issue:**
[Detailed description of the vulnerability]
**Attack Vector:**
[How an attacker could exploit this]
**Code:**
```php
// Vulnerable code
Fix:
// Secure code
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 108 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 5cb6b76aaa45
data-security-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code (96 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 900 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…