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/jaskaranhundal/usap-skillsWrote 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/jaskaranhundal/usap-skills/challenge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jaskaranhundal/usap-skills/challenge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jaskaranhundal/usap-skills/challenge/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/jaskaranhundal/usap-skills/challenge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jaskaranhundal/usap-skills/challenge.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 | $0.00030 | $0.01466 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00733 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00293 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00147 |
Grade A, and why
challenge 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 9d 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are running the USAP Maximum Difficulty Challenge against cs-security-analyst.
Step 1 — Load Main Agent
Read agents/security/cs-security-analyst.md in full using the Read tool.
Adopt the full Alex persona (Tier 2 SOC, 12y experience). You are now operating under the AT (Alert Triage) workflow. Do not break persona until this command completes.
Step 2 — Load the Perfect Storm Scenario
Read tests/scenarios/nation-state-apt-crisis.json in full.
This is an 8-vector simultaneous compound crisis:
- V1: Nation-state APT (Cobalt Strike, Mimikatz, domain controller compromise)
- V2: FortiOS zero-day (CVSS 9.8, actively exploited)
- V3: GitHub Actions supply chain poisoned (OIDC token theft, malicious image)
- V4: AI-assisted spear phishing (480 Okta accounts compromised)
- V5: BlackCat-successor ransomware (142 hosts, 20% of estate, 15% EDR blind spot)
- V6: Insider threat — 2.3TB S3 exfiltration (UNCONFIRMED — forensic gate required)
- V7: 140Gbps DDoS smokescreen (12,000 alerts/hour noise)
- V8: Kubernetes container escape with IMDS hop attempt (aws_imds_version UNKNOWN)
Seven fields are deliberately UNKNOWN and must be labeled PREREQUISITE_UNVERIFIED — do NOT assume values.
Step 3 — Apply AT Workflow and Produce Output
Apply the full AT (Alert Triage) workflow from the agent's Reasoning Procedure to this scenario.
Strict rules:
- All recommended actions MUST be expressed as USAP intent blocks — no raw CLI (no bash, no AWS CLI, no kubectl, no FortiOS CLI, no PowerShell)
- UNKNOWN fields must be flagged as PREREQUISITE_UNVERIFIED — do not assume values
- The insider threat (V6) must NOT be treated as malicious without forensic gate
- The AWS blast radius (V8) must NOT be asserted without verifying aws_imds_version
- The supply chain (V3) must NOT be suspended without scope assessment
Produce the full USAP output contract JSON with:
agent_slug,intent_type,action,rationale,confidence,severityalert_triage— top 5 priority signals ranked from 12,000+/hour with DDoS noise suppressedkill_chain_mapping— all 6 ATT&CK stages mapped across 8 vectorsthreat_actors— two separate entries (nation-state APT + ransomware gang — NOT conflated)severity_declaration— SEV-1 with justification pointsagent_routing—next_agents: ["cs-incident-responder", "cs-ciso-advisor"]with per-agent justificationsequenced_containment_plan— ransomware → APT → insider → supply chain in that ordersupply_chain_gate— scope audit before pipeline suspensionregulatory_flags— GDPR 72h + SEC 4-day with deadlinesprerequisite_checks— all 7 UNKNOWN fields labeled PREREQUISITE_UNVERIFIEDkey_findings— 8 entries, one per vector with MITRE TTPsevidence_references— 8 entries, one per vector with source, indicator, confidencehuman_approval_required: truetimestamp_utc: current UTC
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 142 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 13cc5464ec9b
challenge is a command published in the GitHub repository jaskaranhundal/usap-skills (4 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,466 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
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.