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/stackhawk/agent-skillsWrote 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/rules/stackhawk/agent-skills/stackhawk-api-recipes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/stackhawk/agent-skills/stackhawk-api-recipes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/stackhawk/agent-skills/stackhawk-api-recipes/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/rules/stackhawk/agent-skills/stackhawk-api-recipes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/stackhawk/agent-skills/stackhawk-api-recipes.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 | $0.00077 | $0.03528 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.01411 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00706 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00353 |
Grade A, and why
stackhawk-api-recipes scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 400 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
StackHawk API Reporting Recipes
Pre-built compositions for common security reporting questions using hawk op.
Run hawk op status first to confirm authentication; set HAWK_API_KEY in any
non-interactive session (CI, containers, headless agents).
Setup (run once per shell session when non-interactive):
export HAWK_API_KEY="hawk.xxxxxxxxxxxx" # from app.stackhawk.com → Settings → API Keys
Recipe 1: Org Security Posture
Question: Across all my apps, what is the current security situation?
What it produces: One row per app showing latest-scan finding counts by severity, sorted by High findings descending.
Step 1 — Fetch all apps and recent scans
apps=$(hawk op app list --format json)
scans=$(hawk op scan list --limit 500 --format json)
Step 2 — Build the posture table
# Join latest scan per app to get severity counts
printf '%s\n%s' "${apps}" "${scans}" | jq -rs '
.[0] as $apps | .[1] as $scans |
# Build app name lookup: applicationId -> name
($apps.data | map({(.id): .name}) | add // {}) as $names |
# Find latest completed scan per app
($scans.data
| group_by(.applicationId)
| map(
sort_by(.startedTimestamp) | reverse |
map(select(.status == "COMPLETED")) | .[0]
)
| map(select(. != null))
) as $latest |
# Output sorted by High desc
($latest | sort_by(.highAlertCount // 0 | . * -1))
| ["APP", "ENVIRONMENT", "HIGH", "MEDIUM", "LOW", "LAST_SCAN"],
(.[] | [
($names[.applicationId] // .applicationId),
(.environmentName // "—"),
(.highAlertCount // 0 | tostring),
(.mediumAlertCount // 0 | tostring),
(.lowAlertCount // 0 | tostring),
(.startedTimestamp // "never")
])
| @tsv
' | column -t -s $'\t'
Output format
APP ENVIRONMENT HIGH MEDIUM LOW LAST_SCAN
payment-api Production 5 12 8 2024-01-15T10:30:00Z
auth-service Staging 3 4 1 2024-01-10T09:00:00Z
admin-portal Development 0 0 0 2023-11-01T08:00:00Z
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 Changed 86d1c7fa34c0
- 1mo ago First seen · 400 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A c70233af1dc5
stackhawk-api-recipes is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository stackhawk/agent-skills (16 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 3,528 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
prefer-assertions-over-defensive-checks
Prefer assertions over defensive checks when data is guaranteed to be valid.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.
config-validation-and-normalization
Config validation and normalization responsibilities (defineConfig normalizes, the orm section schema validates and resolves paths, the loader reports per-section diagnostics).