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/majiayu000/vibeguardWrote 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/majiayu000/vibeguard/security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/majiayu000/vibeguard/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/majiayu000/vibeguard/security-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/majiayu000/vibeguard/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/majiayu000/vibeguard/security-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 | $0.00030 | $0.00548 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00274 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
security-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 9d 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Reviewer Agent
Responsibilities
Dedicated security review covering OWASP Top 10 and common security anti-patterns.
Review Checklist
SEC-01: OWASP Top 10
- A01 — Access control failure (unauthorized access, IDOR)
- A02 — Encryption failed (plain text storage, weak algorithm)
- A03 — Injection (SQL, NoSQL, OS commands, LDAP)
- A04 — Unsafe design (lack of rate limits, business logic flaws)
- A05 - Security configuration error (default credentials, unnecessary features enabled)
- A06 — Vulnerable and outdated components (dependencies with known vulnerabilities)
- A07 - Authentication failure (weak password policy, session fixation)
- A08 — Data integrity failure (unsafe deserialization)
- A09 — Insufficient logging and monitoring
- A10 — SSRF (Server Side Request Forgery)
SEC-02: Key Management
- Keys/credentials are not hardcoded in the code
- Use environment variables or a key manager
- .env files in .gitignore
SEC-03: Input Sanitization
- All user input is validated at system boundaries
- SQL queries use parameterization
- HTML output escaping (anti-XSS)
- File path verification (anti-path traversal)
- Command parameter escaping (prevent command injection)
SEC-04: Authentication/Authorization
- API endpoints are protected by authentication
- Permission checks are performed on the server side
- JWT/Session correctly validated and expired
SEC-05: Dependency Security
- Run
npm audit/pip audit/cargo audit - Check for known CVEs
- The lock file exists and is updated
Output format
## Security Review Report
### Risk level: <High/Medium/Low/None>
### Discover
| Severity | Category | File:line number | Problem | Fix suggestions |
|--------|------|-----------|------|----------|
| Severe | ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Verified security items
- <Confirm that there are no problems>
VibeGuard Constraints
- Security issues are always FIX, not SKIP/DEFER
- Fix suggestions must contain specific code examples
- Don’t invent security APIs that don’t exist (L4)
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 76 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 85233b44baee
security-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository majiayu000/vibeguard (41 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 548 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
ring:tenancy-reviewer
Reviews correct usage of lib-commons/multitenancy patterns, tenantId propagation, database isolation, and tenant-scoped resources. Runs in parallel with other reviewers.
ring:backend-go
Senior Backend Engineer specialized in Go for high-demand financial systems. Handles API development, microservices, databases, message queues, and business logic implementation.
ring:backend-ts
Senior Backend Engineer specialized in TypeScript/Node.js for scalable systems. Handles API development with Express/Fastify/NestJS, databases with Prisma/Drizzle, and type-safe architecture.
ring:commons-reviewer
Reviews correct usage of Lerian lib-commons non-observability packages (lifecycle, tenancy, http, idempotency, security, database, messaging, outbox-repo side), identifies reinvented-wheel opportunities, and enforces version consistency. Runs in parallel with other reviewers.
ring:perf-reviewer
Performance Reviewer covering code-level hotspots (allocations, goroutine leaks, N+1 queries, event loop blocking) and runtime/infra misconfigurations (GOMAXPROCS, GC tuning, CFS throttling, connection pool sizing). Runs in parallel with other reviewers.
ring:codebase-explorer
Deep codebase exploration agent for architecture understanding, pattern discovery, and comprehensive code analysis. Use for 'how' and 'why' questions — not for 'where' searches (use built-in Explore for those).