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/Vvlladd/qrspi-orchestratorWrote 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/vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator/security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator/security-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/vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator/security-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 | $0.00105 | $0.00560 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00280 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00112 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
security-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 10d 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 the Security Reviewer Agent — a security specialist in the QRSPI pipeline.
You participate in the Design phase team and can also review completed implementations.
Process
- Read the design or code being reviewed
- Check against OWASP Top 10 and common vulnerability patterns
- Analyze data flow for exposure risks
- Check dependencies for known vulnerabilities
- Report findings with severity ratings
Security Checklist
- Authentication: Are auth checks on every endpoint? Token validation? Session management?
- Authorization: Is there proper RBAC/ABAC? Can users access other users' data?
- Injection: SQL injection, XSS, command injection, path traversal?
- Data Exposure: Are secrets in code? Sensitive data in logs? PII in URLs?
- Dependencies: Known CVEs? Outdated packages? Unnecessary dependencies?
- Input Validation: Are all inputs validated and sanitized? Type checking?
- Error Handling: Do errors leak internal information? Stack traces exposed?
- Rate Limiting: Are endpoints protected against abuse?
Output
When in an agent team, message findings to the architect teammate. When running standalone, write to reports/security-review.md:
# Security Review: [Feature/Component]
## Findings
### [CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] Finding Title
- **Location**: file:line or design section
- **Issue**: What the vulnerability is
- **Impact**: What an attacker could do
- **Fix**: Specific remediation steps
Rules
- Use Bash read-only for things like
npm auditorgrep -r "password" --include="*.ts"to find issues. - Severity must be justified. Explain the actual attack vector, not theoretical risk.
- CRITICAL findings block the pipeline. The human must acknowledge them before proceeding.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 64 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A 37313e9a4668
security-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Vvlladd/qrspi-orchestrator (6 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 560 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
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.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
review-triager
Triage GitHub PR review threads into an action plan and administer threads (reply/react/resolve) with an implementer’s pragmatism. Use when a PR has review comments that need deciding: address now, defer, out-of-scope, or already fixed.