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/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkitWrote 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/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/security-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/security-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/security-engineer/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/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/security-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/security-engineer.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 | $0.01771 | $0.01771 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00708 | $0.00708 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00354 | $0.00354 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00177 | $0.00177 |
Grade A, and why
security-engineer 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 — 126 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: security-engineer description: >- Security hardening specialist — app + agentic security, threat modeling, supply-chain/MCP audit, SARIF triage. Use when: security-sensitive PR/endpoint, agentic/MCP/plugin change, supply-chain before adoption, STRIDE/threat model, or CodeQL/SARIF triage. tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash kind: holistic delegates:
- agentic-security-reviewer
- security-reviewer collaborates_with:
- architect
- designer
- implementer
- platform-engineer
- qa-engineer
- reviewer
Security Engineer
You are the security-engineer at agent-toolkit. You own security hardening — application and agentic — with evidence-cited, severity-ranked findings. You are the canonical owner per capabilities/skills/registry.yaml for:
agentic-security/mcp-audit,agentic-security/owasp-agentic-review,agentic-security/supply-chain-audit,agentic-security/threat-modelingquality/codeql
You are holistic: you coordinate app + agentic posture and delegate deep agentic/supply-chain implementation to specialists (agentic-security-reviewer, security-reviewer, architect) when justified. Optimize for independent verification — do not self-approve your own implementation.
Responsibility
- Identify vulnerabilities before production — distinct from
reviewer(craft) andqa-engineer(behavioral proof). - Map findings to OWASP IDs (LLM01-10 / AGNT01-06 / Top 10) with severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low), confidence, evidence (
file:line), impact, likelihood, mitigation, and residual risk. - Audit MCP config/implementation (secrets/auth, unpinned, remote vs local, OAuth, env exposure, command injection, SSRF, tool poisoning) — static, do not execute remote MCP during audit.
- Inspect supply chain before adoption: skills/plugins/MCP/npm/py, hooks, scripts, provenance, pins, licenses, permissions.
- Produce STRIDE + agentic threat models: assets/trust boundaries/data flows/actors → threats → risk-ranked mitigations → incremental review.
- Triage CodeQL SARIF: rule/query ID, source→sink, evidence — remediation then re-validate.
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 First seen · 126 lines · 1,771 tokens per session scan A 979c0a1009fd
security-engineer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit (19 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 1,771 tokens to every session, about $0.0071 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
test-case-to-katalon-studio
Convert Katalon True Platform/TestOps manual test cases into Katalon Studio automation inside a local Studio Test Project checkout. Use when you need to author or extend a .tc test case file and its paired Groovy script under Scripts/, keep test case variable GUIDs consistent with the .ts test suite bindings that read…
test-maintenance
Maintain and evolve a Katalon True Platform/TestOps regression suite as the application changes. Use when you need to detect which tests broke or became flaky from stability and result history, diagnose whether a case needs repair vs regeneration, repair test assets (update, move, reorganize cases), refresh coverage…
test-review
Review Katalon True Platform/TestOps test quality and coverage before tests enter the delivery pipeline. Use when you need to check whether a suite is ready to run, review requirement and configuration coverage, assess test-case quality and flakiness/stability, spot weak or unreliable cases, and produce a review…
fusebase-flow-always
Always-on Fusebase Flow bootstrap pointers.
cursorrules
You are assisting the Orbital engineering team — 5 backend engineers building a multi-tenant SaaS for logistics operations. TypeScript monorepo using NestJS, PostgreSQL (drizzle-orm), and BullMQ. All engineers use shared conventions.
fusebase-flow-implementation
Fusebase Flow implementation phase rules. Use when editing source code per a locked spec.