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/HermeticOrmus/LibreSecOps-Claude-CodeWrote 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/hermeticormus/libresecops-claude-code/benchmark)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hermeticormus/libresecops-claude-code/benchmark"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hermeticormus/libresecops-claude-code/benchmark/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/hermeticormus/libresecops-claude-code/benchmark"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hermeticormus/libresecops-claude-code/benchmark.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00737 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00295 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
benchmark 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 — 102 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/benchmark
Assess configuration against CIS Benchmark requirements and produce a compliance report.
Trigger
Use this command when:
- Conducting a CIS Benchmark compliance assessment
- Preparing for a security audit that references CIS controls
- Validating that hardening changes were applied correctly
- Establishing a baseline compliance score for a system
- Monitoring configuration drift from hardened state
Input
Required:
- Target: Platform to assess (e.g.,
ubuntu-22.04,docker,kubernetes,aws,nginx)
Optional:
- Profile:
level-1orlevel-2(defaults tolevel-1) - Configuration: Path to configuration files for static analysis
- Previous assessment: Path to previous report for delta comparison
- Sections: Specific benchmark sections to assess (comma-separated)
Process
Step 1: Benchmark Selection
- Match target platform to the correct CIS Benchmark document and version
- Apply the selected profile level (Level 1 or Level 2)
- Filter to specified sections if provided
Step 2: Control Assessment
For each applicable control in the benchmark:
- Read the requirement: What the CIS Benchmark specifies
- Check current state: Examine configuration files, system settings, or cloud configuration
- Assess compliance: PASS (meets requirement), FAIL (does not meet), N/A (not applicable to this environment)
- Document evidence: The specific configuration value or command output that supports the assessment
- Provide remediation: For FAIL findings, specific steps to achieve compliance
Step 3: Scoring
Calculate compliance percentage:
- Only scored controls count toward the percentage
- Not Applicable controls are excluded from the total
- Compliance % = Passed / (Passed + Failed) * 100
Step 4: Gap Analysis
For failed controls:
- Group by severity (critical gaps vs minor gaps)
- Estimate remediation effort for each
- Identify dependencies between controls
- Produce a prioritized remediation plan
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 Changed · +5 lines · +23 tokens per session 43c65c52efe3
- 2mo ago First seen · 97 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 07d368444a79
benchmark is a command published in the GitHub repository HermeticOrmus/LibreSecOps-Claude-Code (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 737 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 2026-09-03.
benchmark compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| benchmarkHermeticOrmus/LibreSecOps-Claude-Code | Command | 4 | 1mo ago | MIT | A | 23 | Claude Code |
| build-agentis-bo/fullstack-forge-skill | Command | 2 | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 11 | Claude Code |
| build-mcpis-bo/fullstack-forge-skill | Command | 2 | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 12 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |