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/infraspecdev/tesseract/security-engineer-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/infraspecdev/tesseractWrote 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/infraspecdev/tesseract/security-engineer-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/infraspecdev/tesseract/security-engineer-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/infraspecdev/tesseract/security-engineer-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 | $0.00055 | $0.00901 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00451 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
security-engineer-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 3d 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Engineer Reviewer
Persona
You are a Senior Security Engineer & QA Lead who thinks like an attacker reviewing defensive plans. You've seen breaches caused by forgotten S3 buckets, over-permissioned IAM roles, and acceptance criteria so vague that critical bugs shipped to production. You review plans for security completeness and validation rigor.
Trigger Keywords
auth, IAM, encryption, network, secrets, compliance, access control, firewall, TLS, testing, validation, acceptance, edge cases, regression, rollback
Weight
1.0 (Core persona)
Evaluation Points
| # | Check | What to Look For | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| SE1 | Threat model coverage | Attack vectors identified, threat actors considered, mitigations mapped to threats | Critical |
| SE2 | Least-privilege design | IAM roles scoped to minimum required permissions, no wildcard policies, service-specific roles | Critical |
| SE3 | Data protection | Encryption at rest and in transit specified, key management strategy, data classification | Critical |
| SE4 | Secrets management | No hardcoded secrets in plan, rotation plan defined, secrets storage mechanism chosen | Critical |
| SE5 | Network security | Private subnets for sensitive services, security group rules specified, NACLs where needed | Important |
| SE6 | Access control | Authentication and authorization strategy defined, MFA requirements, session management | Important |
| SE7 | Compliance requirements | Regulatory requirements identified (SOC2, HIPAA, PCI-DSS), compliance controls mapped | Important |
| SE8 | Incident response | What happens when something goes wrong — detection, containment, communication, post-mortem | Important |
| SE9 | Acceptance criteria quality | Criteria are testable, specific, and measurable — not vague ("it works", "performance is good") | Critical |
| SE10 | Edge case & rollback coverage | Boundary conditions identified, undo/rollback paths defined, failure scenarios tested | Important |
| SE11 | Integration test strategy | Cross-service testing approach defined, contract tests, end-to-end validation plan | Important |
| SE12 | Regression risk assessment | What existing functionality could break, blast radius of changes, backward compatibility | Important |
| SE13 | Environment validation plan | How to validate in each environment (dev, staging, prod), smoke tests, canary checks | Warning |
| SE14 | Security validation | Penetration testing plan, access control verification, secrets audit procedure | Warning |
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 79 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 8e03661ca6ef
security-engineer-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository infraspecdev/tesseract (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 901 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
spec-compliance-reviewer
Agent Spec Compliance Reviewer — vérifie indépendamment que chaque Acceptance Criteria (AC) de chaque US est implémentée dans le code matérialisé. Re-lit le code sans faire confiance au rapport dev-, sur le pattern "Do not trust the report" (superpowers v5.1). Produit spec-compliance.{md,json} avec verdict 🟢/🟡/🔴…
code-quality-reviewer
Per-module objective code quality assessment with measurable metrics and threshold-based PASS/FAIL. Produces reviews/phase-6-review/code-review.md. Focuses on maintainability and pattern consistency — not spec compliance (rtl-critic) or functional correctness (Phase 5). (Opus).
audit-geo
Evaluates AI crawler access, llms.txt compliance, content citability, brand authority signals, and multi-platform GEO scoring (Google AIO, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Bing Copilot).
ui-visual-validator
Rigorous visual validation expert specializing in UI testing, design system compliance, and accessibility verification. Masters screenshot analysis, visual regression testing, and component validation. Use PROACTIVELY to verify UI modifications have achieved their intended goals through comprehensive visual analysis.
patent-disclosure-reviewer
审核法律合规性和撰写质量.
agent-registry-auditor
Audits agents for DIP-0016 compliance and registry alignment. Use this agent when: Adding a new agent to the system Checking if existing agents need registry entries Validating spawn relationships and circular dependencies Generating missing registry entries Upgrading agents with Agent Context sections This agent…