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/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skillsWrote 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/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills/auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills/auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills/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/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills/auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills/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 | $0.00059 | $0.02076 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00830 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00415 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00208 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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 — 225 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Deep codebase analyzer for architectural reviews and compliance audits.
Provider Model Equivalents
Tier: Standard — requires systematic analysis, pattern recognition, and structured output.
| Provider | Model | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Claude | claude-sonnet-4-6, effort: medium |
Default; strong for analysis |
| GPT | gpt-4.1 |
|
| Gemini | gemini-3.1-pro |
|
| Kimi CLI | kimi-for-coding |
Only model available in Kimi Code CLI |
| Kimi API | kimi-k2.5 |
|
| Antigravity | Gemini 3.1 Pro or Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
Select in model dropdown |
When to Use
- Pre-refactoring assessment — understand current architecture before changing it
- Engineering reviews — systematic evaluation of entire modules
- Compliance audits — Swift 6 strict concurrency, privacy manifest, etc.
- Tech debt identification — comprehensive scan for maintainability issues
- Architecture scoring — quantitative assessment of code quality
- Due diligence — evaluating unfamiliar codebases
When NOT to Use
- Quick file lookups → use
navigatorinstead - Reviewing PR changes → use
reviewerinstead - Making code changes → use implementation skills directly
Reading Strategy
Always read systematically by architectural layer:
- Entry Points — App lifecycle, coordinators, root views
- ViewModels/Controllers — Business logic, state management
- Models — Data structures, persistence layer
- Services — External integrations, core business logic
- Utilities/Extensions — Helper functions, cross-cutting concerns
- Tests — Verify coverage patterns, not implementation
Prioritize by impact: Start with files > 500 lines (potential god objects) and core abstractions.
Mechanical Audits
Run these grep checks as part of every audit:
Swift/iOS
# Force unwraps and unsafe operations
grep -rn "try!\|as!\|fatalError\|preconditionFailure" --include="*.swift"
# Concurrency issues
grep -rn "nonisolated(unsafe)\|@unchecked Sendable" --include="*.swift"
grep -rn "Task {" --include="*.swift" | grep -v "@MainActor"
# Dead code indicators
grep -rn "import Combine" --include="*.swift"
grep -rn "class.*:.*Service" --include="*.swift"
# Model safety
grep -rn "@Model" --include="*.swift"
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 225 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A f91722082f90
auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 2,076 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
security-auditor
Performs comprehensive security audits on code and configuration. Use proactively before deployments, after adding new dependencies, or when handling sensitive data flows. Checks OWASP Top 10, dependency vulnerabilities, secrets exposure, and infrastructure security.
code-reviewer
Reviews code for quality, security, performance, and best practices. Use proactively after code changes, before commits, or when reviewing PRs. Identifies bugs, anti-patterns, security vulnerabilities, and suggests improvements.
code-reviewer
Code review and security audit expert. Use for security reviews, Devil's Advocate analysis, quality audits, best practices validation. Triggers: review, security, audit, quality, best practices, vulnerability.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller.
contracts-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to analyze API, data models, and type design. This agent should be invoked proactively when changes affect public contracts, domain models, database schemas, or type definitions.