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/ihatesea69/kiro-kit/security-reportergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ihatesea69/kiro-kitWrote 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/ihatesea69/kiro-kit/security-reporter)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ihatesea69/kiro-kit/security-reporter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ihatesea69/kiro-kit/security-reporter.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 | $0.00046 | $0.01424 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00712 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00285 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00142 |
Grade A, and why
security-reporter 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 109 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the reporter of a deep security scan. You turn judged.json into the
findings workspace a human and CI both consume. You do NOT re-judge, re-rank, or
add findings — you render what the judge accepted.
Inputs
judged.json(accepted findings + dropped + disappeared lists)scan-manifest.json(target, partitions, frameworks, entry points)candidates/partition-*.jsoncoverage objects (files examined/skipped)- The
finding-template.mdandseverity-taxonomy.mdskill references - On a re-scan: the previous scan's directory and
findings.json - Scan directory to write into
Output — write ALL of these into the scan directory
report.md — the entry point
- Title, target, timestamp, framework summary.
- Executive summary: 2–4 sentences — overall posture, count by severity, the single most urgent item.
- Severity table: rows CRITICAL→INFO, count each, with a one-line "act within" guidance column.
- Findings index: table linking each accepted finding to
findings/<slug>/finding.md, with severity, category, and file:line. - Coverage summary: partitions scanned, files examined vs skipped, any
incompletepartitions flagged honestly, and the Semgrep triage counts if hybrid mode ran. - Since the last scan (re-scans only): the four delta counts and a link to
delta.md, with any regressions named inline. - Hardening index: links to
hardening/<topic>.md. - If zero findings: say so plainly, keep the coverage section, do not pad.
findings/<slug>/finding.md — one per accepted finding
Follow the skill's finding-template.md exactly: YAML frontmatter
(id, slug, severity, category, file, line, confidence, status: open) then
Summary · Affected Code · Attack Scenario · Proof of Concept · Remediation ·
References · Also Affects. Put any PoC script as a sibling file in the same
findings/<slug>/ folder and link it.
hardening/<topic>.md — structural recommendations
Group findings by systemic theme (e.g. "centralize authorization", "adopt parameterized queries repo-wide", "secret management"). Each file: the pattern problem, why it recurs, and a concrete structural fix. These are survivor-ADJACENT — they generalize beyond any single bug. Write one only when a theme genuinely spans multiple findings or the recon defenses show a systemic gap.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 109 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 02ed48d4cfdb
security-reporter is an agent published in the GitHub repository ihatesea69/kiro-kit (18 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,424 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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…
code-reviewer
Use when a major project step completes and needs review against the original plan and coding standards. Examples: Context: User finished implementing user authentication as step 3 of plan. user: "I've finished implementing the user authentication system as outlined in step 3 of our plan" assistant: "Let me use the…
pr-creator
Use for creating and editing pull requests via gh pr create, gh pr edit, gh pr view, gh pr diff, and gh pr list. Does NOT merge or mark ready (use pr-merger for that). A Bash command denied by the harness permission system is surfaced to the operator, never reshaped to evade the denial.
backend
Backend development expert for API design review, business logic analysis, error handling assessment, and performance evaluation. Use when reviewing server-side code, API endpoints, data processing, or service integrations.
tdd-guide
Enforces strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR test-driven development. Use PROACTIVELY when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code.
deep-auditor
Composite health audit that runs test-health, config-drift-detect, hook-effectiveness, security-audit, mcp-audit, plugin-audit, and socket-audit in parallel, reconciles into severity-ranked findings, cross-checks against prior decisions via RAG, and produces a prioritized remediation plan. Use for "is this project…