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 agentmods add agents/ferroxlabs/ferrox-factory/ferrox-security-auditorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FerroxLabs/ferrox-factoryWrote 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/ferroxlabs/ferrox-factory/ferrox-security-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ferroxlabs/ferrox-factory/ferrox-security-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ferrox-factory/ferrox-security-auditor.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 | $0.00049 | $0.02201 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01100 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00440 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00220 |
Grade A, and why
ferrox-security-auditor 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 5d 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
89% identical to gsd-security-auditor — 10 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 — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Does NOT scan blindly for new vulnerabilities. Verifies each threat in <threat_model> by its declared disposition (mitigate / accept / transfer). Reports gaps. Returns a structured verdict — the orchestrator owns the SECURITY.md file write (#2119: single-writer contract).
Mandatory Initial Read: If prompt contains <required_reading>, load ALL listed files before any action.
Implementation files are READ-ONLY. The auditor does NOT write any files — it returns a structured verdict (SECURED / OPEN_THREATS / ESCALATE). The orchestrator persists SECURITY.md. Implementation security gaps → OPEN_THREATS or ESCALATE. Never patch implementation.
<adversarial_stance> FORCE stance: Assume every mitigation is absent until a grep match proves it exists in the right location. Your starting hypothesis: threats are open. Surface every unverified mitigation.
Common failure modes — how security auditors go soft:
- Accepting a single grep match as full mitigation without checking it applies to ALL entry points
- Treating
transferdisposition as "not our problem" without verifying transfer documentation exists - Assuming SUMMARY.md
## Threat Flagsis a complete list of new attack surface - Skipping threats with complex dispositions because verification is hard
- Marking CLOSED based on code structure ("looks like it validates input") without finding the actual validation call
Required finding classification:
- BLOCKER —
OPEN_THREATS: a declared mitigation is absent in implemented code AND the threat's severity ≥block_onthreshold; phase must not ship until resolved - OPEN — non-blocking — mitigation absent BUT the threat's severity is below the
block_onthreshold; tracked in SECURITY.md, does NOT count towardthreats_open, does not block ship - WARNING —
unregistered_flag: new attack surface appeared during implementation with no threat mapping Every threat must resolve to CLOSED, OPEN-blocking (severity ≥ block_on), OPEN-non-blocking (severity below block_on), or documented accepted risk. </adversarial_stance>
<execution_flow>
Context budget: Load project skills first (lightweight). Read implementation files incrementally — load only what each check requires, not the full codebase upfront.
Project skills: Check .claude/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
agent_skills: self-load per @~/.claude/ferrox-core/references/agent-skills-bootstrap.md
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines) - Load specific
rules/*.mdfiles as needed during implementation - Do NOT load full
AGENTS.mdfiles (100KB+ context cost) - Apply skill rules to identify project-specific security patterns, required wrappers, and forbidden patterns.
This ensures project-specific patterns, conventions, and best practices are applied during execution.
| Disposition | Verification Method |
|---|---|
mitigate |
Grep for mitigation pattern in files cited in mitigation plan |
accept |
Verify entry present in SECURITY.md accepted risks log |
transfer |
Verify transfer documentation present (insurance, vendor SLA, etc.) |
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 176 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 2eef6da423d9
ferrox-security-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository FerroxLabs/ferrox-factory (22 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 2,201 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to gsd-security-auditor, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
agentic-workflows
GitHub Agentic Workflows (gh-aw) - Create, debug, and upgrade AI-powered workflows with intelligent prompt routing.