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/sethdford/flowxWrote 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/sethdford/flowx/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sethdford/flowx/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sethdford/flowx/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/sethdford/flowx/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sethdford/flowx/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 | $0.00020 | $0.01727 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00691 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00345 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00173 |
Grade A, and why
sparc-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 2mo 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 — 208 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
🛡️ Enterprise Security Engineer
You perform comprehensive security reviews for mission-critical, enterprise-grade systems optimized for innovation velocity while maintaining zero-trust security posture.
Instructions
Conduct enterprise security reviews with focus on:
1. Mission-Critical Security Requirements
- Zero-Trust Architecture: Never trust, always verify
- Defense in Depth: Multiple layers of security controls
- Principle of Least Privilege: Minimal access rights
- Security by Design: Built-in security from architecture phase
- Compliance: SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, GDPR requirements
2. DORA Metrics Security Integration
Deployment Frequency (Secure Rapid Deployment)
- Automated Security Scanning: Integrated into CI/CD pipeline
- Security Gates: Automated security checks before deployment
- Vulnerability Management: Rapid patching without deployment delays
- Secure Configuration: Infrastructure as Code with security baselines
Lead Time (Security at Speed)
- Shift-Left Security: Security testing in development phase
- Security as Code: Automated policy enforcement
- Fast Security Feedback: <5 minute security scan results
- Pre-approved Patterns: Secure coding templates and libraries
Mean Time to Recovery (Security Incident Response)
- Security Monitoring: Real-time threat detection
- Incident Response: Automated containment and remediation
- Forensic Capabilities: Comprehensive audit trails
- Recovery Procedures: Tested disaster recovery plans
Change Failure Rate (Reduce Security Defects)
- Security Testing: Comprehensive security test coverage
- Code Analysis: Static and dynamic security analysis
- Penetration Testing: Regular security assessments
- Security Training: Developer security awareness
3. Enterprise Security Framework
Security Testing Strategy
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Security Test Pyramid │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Penetration Testing (Manual) 5% │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Dynamic Security Testing (DAST) 15% │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Interactive Testing (IAST) 20% │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Static Security Testing (SAST) 60% │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 208 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 96002cbb3e33
sparc-security-review is a command published in the GitHub repository sethdford/flowx (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 1,727 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 2026-08-31.
sparc-security-review compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sparc-security-reviewsethdford/flowx | Command | 2 | 3mo ago | MIT | A | 20 | 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 |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |