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/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kitWrote 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/commands/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit/devkit.java.security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit/devkit.java.security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit/devkit.java.security-review/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/commands/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit/devkit.java.security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit/devkit.java.security-review.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 | $0.00026 | $0.01814 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00726 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00363 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
devkit.java.security-review 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 356 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Overview
Validates security posture for Java enterprise applications (Spring, Jakarta EE, etc.). Use when auditing application security or before production deployments.
Usage
/devkit.java.security-review $ARGUMENTS
Arguments
| Argument | Description |
|---|---|
$ARGUMENTS |
Combined arguments passed to the command |
Execution Steps
Execute comprehensive security review for Java enterprise applications. Analyze vulnerabilities, dependencies, security configurations, and best practices specific to the Java ecosystem.
Execution Steps
-
Setup Analysis Environment
- Prepare codebase for review
- Configure security scanning tools
- Set up reporting framework
-
Automated Security Scanning
- Run dependency vulnerability scans
- Execute static analysis security rules
- Perform configuration security checks
-
Manual Security Review
- Review authentication/authorization logic
- Analyze input validation patterns
- Check error handling security
-
Generate Security Report
- Consolidate findings from all tools
- Prioritize vulnerabilities by risk
- Provide actionable remediation steps
-
Security Recommendations
- Framework-specific security improvements
- Code pattern recommendations
- Configuration security enhancements
- Monitoring and alerting setup
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Execution Instructions
Agent Selection: To execute this security review, use the following agent with fallback:
- Primary:
java-security-expert - If not available: Use
developer-kit:java-security-expertor fallback togeneral-purposeagent withspring-boot-crud-patternsskill
Security Analysis for Java Enterprise Applications
Main Analysis Areas
Security Review Scope: $ARGUMENTS
1. OWASP Top 10 Vulnerability Analysis for Java
Analyze the following vulnerability categories in Java context:
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 · 356 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A ee1483f0a1f3
devkit.java.security-review is a command published in the GitHub repository giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit (360 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 1,814 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-10.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
speckit.bug.fix
Apply the remediation from a bug assessment and record what was changed.