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/ldap)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/ldap"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts/ldap.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00075 | $0.01672 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00836 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00334 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00167 |
Grade A, and why
abp-ldap-login-integration 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 7d 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 — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ABP LDAP Login Integration
Implement LDAP login integration in an ABP solution by extending the existing authentication flow instead of replacing it.
User request: $ARGUMENTS
Pre-flight
- Read
CLAUDE.mdif it exists for repository conventions. - Detect the solution layout before changing code.
- Locate the authentication entrypoint, identity verification path, and any existing LDAP abstractions.
Typical search targets:
rg -n "LoginModel|SignInManager|PasswordSignInAsync|CheckPasswordAsync|IdentityUserManager" src test
rg -n "LDAP|Ldap|IsInternalUser|DistinguishedName|DN" src test
rg --files -g "*AuthServer*.cs" -g "*HttpApi.Host*.cs" -g "*.Domain*.csproj" -g "*EntityFrameworkCore*.csproj"
Objective
Preserve the ABP default login pipeline while inserting a custom LDAP authentication branch for external users only.
Target behavior:
- Respect
LDAP:Enable. - Keep internal users on local password validation.
- Authenticate external users against LDAP.
- Require stored LDAP identity data such as
DNfor LDAP-authenticated users. - Keep LDAP login separate from LDAP sync, user import, role mapping, and provisioning unless explicitly requested.
Architecture Rules
- Do not replace the login UI, login endpoint, or ABP page model unless the repository already does that.
- Prefer extending the identity verification layer instead of rewriting the top-level login flow.
- Keep ABP lockout, audit, security stamp, external login, and password sign-in behavior intact.
- Do not introduce new feature flags unless the repository already uses them for auth customization.
- Do not silently create or sync users from LDAP unless the user explicitly requests provisioning.
- Detect actual implementation points from the repository; do not assume fixed namespaces or paths.
Workflow
1. Verify Project Structure
Identify the relevant projects and files:
*.AuthServeror*.IdentityServer*.HttpApi.Hostif login or claims flow is split*.Domainfor user properties and constants*.EntityFrameworkCoreor equivalent integration layer for DI wiring
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 232 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 46d14571187e
abp-ldap-login-integration is a command published in the GitHub repository thapaliyabikendra/ai-artifacts (24 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,672 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
init
Initialize configurations for Supabase local development.
http-service
Build, review or debug a Bun HTTP service. Loads the http-service skill, then works the task through its workflow.
start-10-1
A guided lesson on setting up clasp, a command-line tool for managing Google Apps Script projects, and connecting it to Google’s Apps Script API.
api-contract-review
Review an API contract (endpoints, request/response shapes, error codes, auth model) BEFORE implementation for naming consistency, versioning, pagination, idempotency, and alignment with existing endpoints. Distinct from review-hard (post-implementation risk) and repo-consistency-sweep (pattern matching on written…
build
Discover an AI Gateway's models and MCP tools, retrieve a credential, and integrate them into your app — call a model, connect MCP tools, or scaffold a runnable agent.
fastapi
FastAPI application design and implementation conventions. Use this skill when building, updating, or reviewing FastAPI services, routers, dependencies, request/response schemas, streaming endpoints, or API tests. Trigger on FastAPI-specific work such as path operation design, dependency injection, response models…