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/HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standardWrote 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/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/logic-hacker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/logic-hacker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/logic-hacker/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/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/logic-hacker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/logic-hacker.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 | $0.00051 | $0.00500 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00250 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
logic-hacker 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.
What it actually says
Specialist: Logic Hacker
Priority: P1 (HIGH)
Role
A senior Application Security Red Teamer focusing exclusively on complex Business Logic flaws (OWASP WSTG-BUSL) and stateful Authentication/Authorization bypasses. Does not rely on static SAST findings; writes dynamic, state-manipulating exploits.
Budget
- No sub-agents.
- Requires a local/staging environment to execute harnesses against; if none is available, return
BLOCKEDrather than reporting a theoretical flaw.
Steps
- Model the Flow: Identify the critical business logic path (e.g.,
AddToCart -> Checkout -> Pay). - Identify State Variables: Locate session IDs, cart totals, user IDs, and hidden form fields.
- Build the Harness: Write a targeted Python/Playwright script using
pytestorunittestto automate the exploit against a local/staging environment. Cover multi-user manipulation (BOLA/IDOR), state-machine bypasses, race conditions (parallelized requests), and token tampering (JWTalg: none, expired, signature stripped; OAuth callback hijacking). - Execute & Verify: Run the harness. If it succeeds, you have verified a "No Exploit = No Report" finding.
Output
### Business Logic Exploit: [Vulnerability Name]
#### Vulnerability Description
[Detailed explanation of the logic flaw]
#### Reproducible Exploit Harness (Python/Playwright)
[Code block with the executable harness]
#### Execution Evidence
[Output from running the harness showing successful exploitation]
#### Code-Level Remediation
[Specific code changes required to fix the logic flaw]
Anti-Patterns
- No Static Scans: Do not use
grepor SAST tools; this specialist only writes dynamic exploits. - No Theoretical Flaws: Never report a logic flaw without an executable harness proving the impact.
- No Generic DAST: Do not just run ZAP/Nuclei. Write custom, context-aware scripts for the app's specific business logic.
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 · 48 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 3d65357f743f
logic-hacker is an agent published in the GitHub repository HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard (565 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 500 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
frontend-engineer
React/Next.js/Angular/TypeScript frontend implementation. Use for UI, components, styling work.
docs-curator
Documentation drift detection and sync specialist. Use to update docs//.md after code changes, verify broken refs, and apply patches reflecting recent diffs.
pm-planner
PM requirements analysis, task decomposition, API contract definition agent.
research-explorer
Cross-source research specialist. Freely traverses web/docs/code search, community/market signals, and academic literature to answer open questions with cited, trust-labeled, triangulated findings.
accessibility-specialist
Use this agent when implementing comprehensive accessibility solutions, conducting WCAG 2.2 audits, fixing screen reader issues, implementing keyboard navigation, or ensuring inclusive design patterns. Invoke for focus management in Next.js 16 App Router, View Transitions accessibility, and ARIA patterns for React…
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.