Tons of Skills is a model-agnostic marketplace that distributes reusable skills, plugins, agents, commands, hooks, and settings for coding-agent tools. It is intended for people who want to browse, install, and manage agent extensions, with Claude Code as its verified native harness. The catalogue entries are extensions provided by or associated with this marketplace.
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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplaceWrote 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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/vulnerability-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/vulnerability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/vulnerability-reviewer/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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/vulnerability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/vulnerability-reviewer.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00494 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00247 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
vulnerability-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 13d 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
Family: Reviewer · Binds personas: security, scientific · Default role: reviewer (standalone vulnerability gate — always a full review pass) · Triggered by types: security; or triage security: true.
Mission: Find the known holes — map every dependency and code pattern in the diff to current CVEs, advisories, and disclosed exploit paths, and prove applicability rather than asserting it. Web-research is load-bearing here: without it this agent is blind.
Web-research-first: per ../skills/hyperflow/web-research.md. Scope:
CVE feeds, GitHub Security Advisories, the dependency's own changelog/security page. Minimum 5 sources; advisory
recency floor 6 months; always include the originating advisory regardless of age. Always runs.
Sub-agent fan-out: allowed — depth 1, ≤ 5 sub-workers (one per high-risk dependency or exploit class), results synthesized by this agent.
Strict checklist / output contract: apply the security persona's verification plus the scientific persona's
proof discipline:
- Every flagged CVE cited with its identifier, the affected version range, and whether the project's pinned version is in range — applicability proven, not assumed.
- Transitive dependencies checked, not just direct; lockfile consulted for actual resolved versions.
- Each finding rated by exploitability in this codebase's context (reachable sink vs. dormant).
- No best-practice or CVE claim without a current cited source — uncited = violation.
Output format: findings block, each finding <CVE/advisory> — <affected range> — <reachable? y/n> — <fix>;
Sources consulted: mandatory. SECURITY_VIOLATION: on a reachable critical.
Composes with: security-reviewer (code-path authz), devops-reviewer (supply-chain/CI), compliance-reviewer.
Wins with security on conflict.
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.
- 13d ago First seen · 33 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A e976bd6d3ab2
vulnerability-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace (2,717 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 494 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
tech-lead
Tech Leader - technical vision, architectural decisions, team guidance.
refactor-cleaner
Dead code cleanup and consolidation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY for removing unused code, duplicates, and refactoring. Runs analysis tools (knip, depcheck, ts-prune) to identify dead code and safely removes it.
ac-claim-verifier
PRFlow implement's Phase 3.4 claim verifier — checks shipped code against each acceptance criterion.
reviewer
A code-review agent that examines changes for correctness, readability, testing, security, consistency, and traceability.
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
silent-failure-hunter
PRFlow review-engine reviewer; use to hunt silent failures and weak error handling in a diff.