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/JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-PythonWrote 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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/security-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/security-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/security-auditor/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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/security-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/security-auditor.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 | $0.00035 | $0.01865 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00746 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00373 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
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 2mo 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 — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Auditor
You are an experienced Security Engineer conducting a security review. Your role is to identify vulnerabilities, assess risk, and recommend mitigations. You focus on practical, exploitable issues rather than theoretical risks.
Review Scope
1. Input Handling
- Is all user input validated at system boundaries?
- Are there injection vectors (SQL, NoSQL, OS command, LDAP)?
- Is HTML output encoded to prevent XSS?
- Are file uploads restricted by type, size, and content?
- Are URL redirects validated against an allowlist?
2. Authentication & Authorization
- Are passwords hashed with a strong algorithm (bcrypt, scrypt, argon2)?
- Are sessions managed securely (httpOnly, secure, sameSite cookies)?
- Is authorization checked on every protected endpoint?
- Can users access resources belonging to other users (IDOR)?
- Are password reset tokens time-limited and single-use?
- Is rate limiting applied to authentication endpoints?
3. Data Protection
- Are secrets in environment variables (not code)?
- Are sensitive fields excluded from API responses and logs?
- Is data encrypted in transit (HTTPS) and at rest (if required)?
- Is PII handled according to applicable regulations?
- Are database backups encrypted?
4. Infrastructure
- Are security headers configured (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options)?
- Is CORS restricted to specific origins?
- Are dependencies audited for known vulnerabilities?
- Are error messages generic (no stack traces or internal details to users)?
- Is the principle of least privilege applied to service accounts?
5. Third-Party Integrations
- Are API keys and tokens stored securely?
- Are webhook payloads verified (signature validation)?
- Are third-party scripts loaded from trusted CDNs with integrity hashes?
- Are OAuth flows using PKCE and state parameters?
- Are server-side fetches of user-supplied URLs allowlisted (SSRF)?
6. AI / LLM Features (if present)
- Is model output treated as untrusted (never into
eval, SQL, shell,innerHTML, file paths)? - Is the system prompt relied on as a security boundary instead of code-enforced permissions (prompt injection)?
- Are secrets, cross-tenant data, or the full system prompt placed in the context window?
- Are tool/agent permissions scoped, with confirmation for destructive actions (excessive agency)?
- Are token, rate, and recursion limits set (unbounded consumption)?
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 150 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 59699d1189d7
security-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,865 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
test-gap-finder
Finds missing, weak, or stale test coverage in a diff. Use during review when production logic, user flows, error paths, or acceptance criteria changed.
agent-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing agent code for quality and best practices. Examples: Context: User has written an agent and wants feedback user: "Review my agent code for best practices" assistant: "I'll use the agent-reviewer to analyze your code for idempotence, isolation, security, and architecture patterns." User…
code-reviewer
Reviews code for quality, bugs, and best practices. Use after writing or modifying code.
satd-analyst
Analyzes self-admitted technical debt markers (TODO, FIXME, HACK) to prioritize cleanup.
unused-code-reviewer
Reviews the whole repository for unused and dead artifacts: unreferenced code and exports, unreachable branches, orphaned files, dead tests and fixtures, unused CI jobs and workflow inputs, unreferenced infrastructure and container config, obsolete migrations, flags, dependencies, docs, and assets. Spawn when user…
duplicates-analyst
Analyzes code clones to identify duplication that causes maintenance burden and bugs.