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.
npx agentmods add commands/uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineering/fix-findinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineeringWrote 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/uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineering/fix-finding)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineering/fix-finding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineering/fix-finding.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00357 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00179 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
fix-finding 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 4d 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.
What it actually says
Apply a targeted fix to a specific security finding identified in a prior review.
Steps
-
Parse the argument — accept either:
- A finding number from the most recent report (e.g.,
/fix-finding 3) - A description of what to fix (e.g.,
/fix-finding "s3 public access" terraform/main.tf)
- A finding number from the most recent report (e.g.,
-
Read the relevant file(s) to understand current state.
-
Apply the minimal, correct fix:
- Do not refactor unrelated code
- Preserve existing formatting and style
- Add an inline comment explaining why the change was made (if non-obvious)
-
Show a diff of the change before applying it and ask for confirmation.
-
After applying, re-check the fixed lines against the security checklist to confirm the finding is resolved and no new issues were introduced.
-
Report: "Fixed [finding title] in [file:line]. Control [framework ID] now satisfied."
Safety Rules
- Never delete resource definitions — only add security controls to existing ones
- Never change resource names, IDs, or tags unless the finding explicitly requires it
- If the fix requires secret values (e.g., KMS key ARN), use a
TODOplaceholder and instruct the user to fill it in - If unsure about the correct fix, explain the options and ask the user to choose
Usage
/fix-finding 2
/fix-finding "open security group" terraform/vpc.tf
/fix-finding "container running as root" kubernetes/deployment.yaml
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 43 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 0fb140fb46b3
fix-finding is a command published in the GitHub repository uttej-badwane/secure-cloud-prompt-engineering (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 357 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
aod.document
Quality review — code simplification, docstrings, CHANGELOG, API docs (supports --autonomous).
aod.project-plan
Create implementation plan with dual sign-off (PM + Architect) - Streamlined v2.
tachi.architecture
Generate an architecture description for tachi threat modeling input.
aod.run
Run the full AOD lifecycle orchestrator — chains all 6 stages (Discover → Define → Plan → Build → Deliver → Document) with session-resilient state and governance gates at every boundary.
aod.blueprint
Unified project setup & story generation — auto-detects new vs existing projects.
compliance
이전 보안 진단 보고서의 Finding들이 패치되었는지 확인하고, 변경된 코드에서 신규 취약점을 탐색합니다.