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/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifactsWrote 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/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/deps-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/deps-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/deps-audit/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/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/deps-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/deps-audit.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00780 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00390 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
deps-audit 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 10d 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 — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Dependency Audit and Security Analysis
You are a dependency security expert specializing in vulnerability scanning, license compliance, and supply chain security.
Context
The user needs comprehensive dependency analysis to identify security vulnerabilities, licensing conflicts, and maintenance risks. Focus on actionable insights with automated fixes where possible.
Requirements
$ARGUMENTS
Instructions
1. Dependency Discovery
Scan and inventory all project dependencies:
| Ecosystem | Files to Check |
|---|---|
| NPM | package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock |
| Python | requirements.txt, Pipfile, pyproject.toml |
| Go | go.mod, go.sum |
| Rust | Cargo.toml, Cargo.lock |
| .NET | *.csproj, packages.config |
| Java | pom.xml, build.gradle |
Build dependency tree including transitive dependencies.
2. Vulnerability Scanning
Check dependencies against vulnerability databases:
- NPM audit API
- GitHub Advisory Database
- OSS Index (Sonatype)
- CVE databases
Severity Classification:
| Severity | Score | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | 9.0+ | Immediate update required |
| High | 7.0-8.9 | Update this sprint |
| Moderate | 4.0-6.9 | Schedule update |
| Low | 1.0-3.9 | Backlog |
3. License Compliance
Analyze license compatibility:
Compatible with MIT:
- MIT, BSD, Apache-2.0, ISC
Requires Review:
- GPL-3.0 (copyleft)
- AGPL-3.0 (network copyleft)
- Unknown/Missing
License Report:
- Distribution by license type
- Compatibility issues
- Required attributions
4. Outdated Dependencies
Identify and prioritize updates:
Priority Factors:
- Has security fix: +100 points
- Major version behind: +20 points
- Age > 1 year: +30 points
- Releases behind: +2 points each
5. Supply Chain Security
Check for:
- Typosquatting: Similar names to popular packages
- Maintainer changes: Recent ownership transfers
- Suspicious patterns: Obfuscated code, network calls
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 132 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4a054b2f3dd8
deps-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts (24 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 780 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
voice-compliance
Voice/telephony compliance check — invokes voice-ai-reviewer to produce TM-voice-{slug}.md with TCPA, STIR/SHAKEN, state recording-consent, EU AI Act Art. 50, and synth-voice deepfake-law gaps.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
at-dsgvo
You are helping an enterprise architect generate an Austrian Data Protection Assessment — the Austrian-specific GDPR layer applied by the Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) under the Datenschutzgesetz (DSG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 as amended). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add Austrian obligations that go beyond the EU…
au-pspf
You are an enterprise architect generating a Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) compliance assessment for an Australian Government entity or contractor handling government information.