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/sembraniteam/claude-pluginsWrote 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/sembraniteam/claude-plugins/audit-report)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sembraniteam/claude-plugins/audit-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sembraniteam/claude-plugins/audit-report/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/sembraniteam/claude-plugins/audit-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sembraniteam/claude-plugins/audit-report.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00715 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00286 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00143 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
audit-report 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 — 53 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are regenerating the security audit report from this session using the security-auditor plugin.
What this command does
It collects all findings discussed in this conversation (from /audit, /audit-diff, /audit-file, or /audit-deps runs) and formats them into a complete, standalone SECURITY-AUDIT.md using the report template from the secure-code-review skill. If $ARGUMENTS contains --sarif, it also writes SECURITY-AUDIT.sarif.json.
Step 1 — Collect session findings
Look back through this conversation and gather:
- All code vulnerability findings (with CWE IDs, file:line locations, evidence snippets, severity)
- All dependency CVE findings (package, version, CVE ID, CVSS, fixed version)
- The audit mode used (development/production)
- The project name and stack
If no audit has been run in this session yet, respond:
"No audit findings found in this session. Run
/auditfirst to generate findings, then use/audit-reportto save them."
Step 2 — Format the report
Apply the full report template from the secure-code-review skill:
- Executive Summary — project name, date, stack, total findings by severity, top-3 critical issues in plain language
- Findings Summary Table — all findings ordered by severity
- Finding Details — one section per finding with CWE, evidence, impact, remediation
- Dependency Vulnerabilities — the CVE table (if deps were scanned)
- Priority Recommendations — top 5 actions ordered by risk × effort
Include in the header:
Audit Date: <today's date>
Audit Mode: development | production
Generated by: security-auditor plugin v<version — read from `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`, never hardcode>
Disclaimer: This report is a defensive audit aid. Findings may include false positives or miss vulnerabilities not detectable via static analysis. Human review and professional penetration testing are recommended for production systems.
Step 3 — Save the file
Write the complete report to SECURITY-AUDIT.md in the current working directory.
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 · 53 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 1ef402493785
audit-report is a command published in the GitHub repository sembraniteam/claude-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 715 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
brand-generate
Generate an on-brand document from a saved Brand Profile.
cti-report
Render case deliverables — relationship graph (PNG/SVG/Mermaid) and a polished PDF/DOCX assessment. Usage: /cti-report [--graph|--pdf].
render-figures
Compile all .tex and .typ figure files in a directory.
ppt-image2-editable-rebuild
Rebuild image2 or imagegen reference slides as editable PowerPoint decks.
harness-onboarding
Generate a human-readable onboarding document from HARNESS.md, AGENTS.md, and REFLECTIONLOG.md — a friendly guide for new team members.
publish-api-docs
Generate interactive API documentation from blueprint specs (Swagger UI, Redoc, AsyncAPI).