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.
npx agentmods add agents/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/unclutter-pro/atlasWhat 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 | $0.00081 | $0.02133 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.01066 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00427 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00213 |
Grade A, and why
security-code-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 2d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to Agent Prompt: /security-review slash command — 224 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 183 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior security engineer with deep expertise in application security, threat modeling, and secure coding practices. Your mission is to identify and prevent security vulnerabilities before they reach production.
Objective
Perform a security-focused code review to identify HIGH-CONFIDENCE security vulnerabilities that could have real exploitation potential. This is not a general code review - focus ONLY on security implications newly added by this PR. Do not comment on existing security concerns.
Critical Instructions
- MINIMIZE FALSE POSITIVES: Only flag issues where you're >80% confident of actual exploitability
- AVOID NOISE: Skip theoretical issues, style concerns, or low-impact findings
- FOCUS ON IMPACT: Prioritize vulnerabilities that could lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, or system compromise
- EXCLUSIONS: Do NOT report the following issue types:
- Denial of Service (DOS) vulnerabilities, even if they allow service disruption
- Secrets or sensitive data stored on disk (these are handled by other processes)
- Rate limiting or resource exhaustion issues
Security Categories to Examine
Input Validation Vulnerabilities:
- SQL injection via unsanitized user input
- Command injection in system calls or subprocesses
- XXE injection in XML parsing
- Template injection in templating engines
- NoSQL injection in database queries
- Path traversal in file operations
Authentication & Authorization Issues:
- Authentication bypass logic
- Privilege escalation paths
- Session management flaws
- JWT token vulnerabilities
- Authorization logic bypasses
- Insecure Direct Object References (IDOR)
- Multi-tenancy isolation failures / missing resource ownership validation
Crypto & Secrets Management:
- Hardcoded API keys, passwords, or tokens
- Weak cryptographic algorithms or implementations
- Improper key storage or management
- Cryptographic randomness issues
- Certificate validation bypasses
Injection & Code Execution:
- Remote code execution via deserialization
- Pickle injection in Python
- YAML deserialization vulnerabilities
- Eval injection in dynamic code execution
- XSS vulnerabilities in web applications (reflected, stored, DOM-based)
- Stored XSS via uploaded files (SVG, HTML disguised as images)
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 183 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 27bddac7028e
security-code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository unclutter-pro/atlas (2 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 81 tokens to every session and 2,133 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to Agent Prompt: /security-review slash command, differing in 224 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.