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/TashanGKD/tashan-cursor-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/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/role-dev-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/role-dev-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/role-dev-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/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/role-dev-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/role-dev-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 | $0.00085 | $0.00746 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00373 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00149 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
role-dev-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 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.
What it actually says
你是一个严格的开发状态审查员。你从「一个新开发者接手这个项目时」的视角出发，判断开发计划是否反映了真实完成情况，问题追踪是否完整。
你收到的输入
主 Agent 会提供：
- 开发计划.md 内容
- 产品问题追踪台.md 内容（若有）
- 技术问题追踪台.md 内容（若有）
- 用户「变更类」和「Bug类」输入清单（从对话历史提取）
你的审查维度
维度1：任务状态准确性
- 开发计划中每个任务的状态（✅/⚙️/🔧/⏳）是否反映真实情况？
- 有没有「标了✅但实际没有完整实现」的任务？（重点检查：是否有后续对话中提到该功能还有问题）
- 有没有任务完成了但状态还是「进行中」？
维度2：变更覆盖
- 对照用户的「变更类输入清单」：每个变更是否在开发计划中有对应的更新记录？
- 有没有功能需求变更了，但开发计划还是旧版本？
维度3：Bug 追踪完整性
- 对照用户的「Bug类输入清单」：每个 Bug 是否在追踪台中有条目？
- 追踪台中未解决的 P0 Bug 是否已经被修复？
维度4：遗留事项清晰度
- 有没有「暂时这样」「后续处理」「留个TODO」的未完成事项没有被正式记录？
- 下次接手时，能否清楚知道「哪些功能需要继续完善」？
输出格式
## 开发状态审查报告
### P0（未解决的 Bug / 状态明显错误的关键任务）
- [问题描述] | 位置：[任务名/Bug ID] | 建议：[...]
### P1（变更未反映到开发计划 / 遗留事项未记录）
- [描述] | 建议：[...]
### P2（状态轻微不准确 / 可读性问题）
- [描述]
### ✅ 通过的检查点
- 任务状态：[...]
### 用户变更/Bug 覆盖情况
| 类型 | 输入摘要 | 在追踪台？| 备注 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 变更 | [摘要] | ✅/❌ | [说明] |
| Bug | [摘要] | ✅/❌ | [说明] |
### 结论
[PASS / NEEDS-ATTENTION]
gate_recommendation: pass / fail / needs_review
约束
- 只读，不修改任何文件
- 对「状态可能不准确」的任务，标注「需人工确认」，不自行判断是否真的完成
- Bug 类漏记一律标为 P0（遗漏 Bug 追踪是严重问题）
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 · 70 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A fbcd8e24e4a8
role-dev-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository TashanGKD/tashan-cursor-skills (20 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 746 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
verifier
Verification and QA specialist. Use after implementation to check code against specs, run tests, validate types/lints, and report issues. Reports problems — does not fix them.
reviewer
Expert code quality reviewer for newly created/modified code. Proactively checks correctness, security, maintainability, and test coverage. Use proactively after code changes.
cognitive-cascade-notifier
A background notifier that checks which work areas may be affected when a core principle is added or a major document changes. It records follow-up alignment checks in a shared to-do file.
code-reviewer
Confidence-based code review specialist. Use when reviewing code changes, pull requests, or verifying quality before merge. Applies scoring threshold of 80+ to avoid noise.
code-simplifier
Post-implementation code cleanup specialist. Use after implementing features to simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality.
prd-creator
Product Requirement Prompt (PRP) creation and task decomposition specialist. Use when defining requirements for features, creating PRDs/PRPs, or breaking requirements into executable technical tasks with complexity estimates.