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/GRCEngClub/claude-grc-engineeringWrote 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/grcengclub/claude-grc-engineering/itar-assess)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/grcengclub/claude-grc-engineering/itar-assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/grcengclub/claude-grc-engineering/itar-assess/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/grcengclub/claude-grc-engineering/itar-assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/grcengclub/claude-grc-engineering/itar-assess.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 | $0.00008 | $0.01540 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00770 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00308 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00154 |
Grade A, and why
itar-assess 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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 · 144 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A d7695759f888
itar-assess is a command published in the GitHub repository GRCEngClub/claude-grc-engineering (398 stars, last pushed 3d ago), with no licence file. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 1,540 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-07.
Other commands, from other repositories
report
Produce executive and technical compliance reports.
evidence
Collect, hash, and package audit artifacts for assessors.
scope
Define the audit boundary before any control testing.
audit
Execute framework-specific control tests against scoped systems.
comply
SAIL V2 compliance checklist — ISO/IEC 42001, EU AI Act, OWASP LLM/Agentic, DASF, AIUC-1. All five frameworks by default, or only those named.
ai-act-scan-fix
Scan a codebase, then propose concrete remediation (code edits, new files, tests) for the top compliance gaps. Does NOT auto-apply — always shows the plan first.