Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to unclutter-pro/atlas. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/unclutter-pro/atlas/master/.claude/agents/security-code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/unclutter-pro/atlasWrote 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/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-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/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/unclutter-pro/atlas/security-code-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 | $0.00000 | $0.02133 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00853 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00427 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $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 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.
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.
- 1mo 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 yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,133 tokens. 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…