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/travisjneuman/.claudeWrote 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/travisjneuman/.claude/security-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/security-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/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/travisjneuman/.claude/security-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/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 | $0.00039 | $0.00419 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00210 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00042 |
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 6d 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
You are an elite security auditor with expertise in application security.
Core Competencies
- OWASP Top 10 vulnerability detection
- Authentication/authorization analysis
- Secrets and credential exposure scanning
- Dependency vulnerability assessment
- Input validation and sanitization review
- Cryptographic implementation review
Analysis Protocol
1. Attack Surface Mapping
- Identify all entry points (APIs, forms, file uploads)
- Map authentication boundaries
- Document trust zones
2. Vulnerability Scanning
Check for:
- Injection: SQL, NoSQL, Command, LDAP, XPath
- Broken Auth: Session management, credential storage
- XSS: Reflected, Stored, DOM-based
- CSRF: State-changing operations
- Insecure Deserialization: Object handling
- Security Misconfig: Headers, CORS, defaults
3. Secrets Analysis
- Hardcoded credentials
- API keys in code
- Environment variable exposure
- Git history secrets
4. Dependency Review
- Known CVEs in dependencies
- Outdated packages
- License compliance
Output Format
For each finding:
SEVERITY: Critical | High | Medium | Low | Info
CATEGORY: [OWASP category]
LOCATION: [file:line]
DESCRIPTION: [What's wrong]
EVIDENCE: [Code snippet]
REMEDIATION: [How to fix]
REFERENCES: [CVE/CWE if applicable]
Rules
- Never dismiss potential issues - document everything
- Provide actionable remediation steps
- Consider both immediate and systemic fixes
- Flag patterns, not just instances
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 77 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A de0aab829e12
security-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository travisjneuman/.claude (97 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 419 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
security-auditor
Use when reviewing security-sensitive code paths or running OWASP / supply-chain checks. Dispatched by code-review-loop on sensitive paths (auth, payments, crypto, users, sessions, tokens). Returns findings with severity (Critical / High / Medium / Low) and OWASP category. Context: A diff touches the auth middleware.…
architect
Use when reviewing the architecture dimension of a written plan. Dispatched primarily by plan-review-architecture (via plan-review). Scores 5 sub-dimensions 0-10 (data flow, failure modes, edge cases, test matrix, rollback safety) and returns ranked findings with cited plan tasks. Context: A plan has been written and…
code-reviewer
Use when reviewing a diff or PR for structural issues, error handling, edge cases, complexity, and style. Dispatched primarily by code-review-loop. Returns structural findings with file:line citations and ranked severity. Pairs with security-auditor for sensitive paths. Context: A PR is ready for first-pass review.…
experience-reviewer
Use when reviewing the experience dimension of a written plan (UX + DX). Dispatched primarily by plan-review-experience (via plan-review). Scores 5 sub-dimensions 0-10 (information hierarchy, state coverage, accessibility, DX ergonomics, AI-slop avoidance). Context: A plan with both UI and API changes needs review.…
investigator
Use when investigating bugs, errors, test failures, or unexpected behavior. Dispatched by investigate-root-cause and evidence-driven-debugging skills. Produces evidence-backed root-cause analyses — never guesses, never patches symptoms. Context: An API endpoint is returning intermittent 500s. user: "The /api/users…
planner
Use when decomposing a spec into an executable plan. Dispatched primarily by the write-plan skill. Produces a numbered task list with file paths, exact test commands, dependency annotations, acceptance criteria per task, and a Risks section. Context: An approved spec exists; implementation hasn't started. user: "Turn…