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 skills/0xlayerghost/solidity-agent-kit/solidity-checklistnpx skills add 0xlayerghost/solidity-agent-kit --skill solidity-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0xlayerghost/solidity-agent-kitWhat 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 | $0.00068 | $0.02715 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01358 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00543 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00271 |
Grade A, and why
solidity-checklist 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 2d 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 — 291 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Solidity Checklist
Language Rule
- Always respond in the same language the user is using. If the user asks in Chinese, respond in Chinese. If in English, respond in English.
Why This Skill Exists
Most on-chain operation failures come from skipping systematic verification. Instead of the reactive loop:
deploy -> fail -> paste error -> ask AI -> retry -> fail again -> ask again
This skill enforces a proactive verification flow:
check permissions -> check dependencies -> check params -> check security -> test locally -> execute -> capture knowledge
The 6-Layer Preflight Flow
Every on-chain operation MUST pass through these 6 layers in order before execution.
Layer 1: PERMISSIONS — Do I have the right to do this?
Layer 2: DEPENDENCIES — Do I understand what this affects?
Layer 3: PARAMETERS — Are my inputs correct?
Layer 4: SECURITY — Is this safe to execute?
Layer 5: TESTING — Have I verified locally first?
Layer 6: EXECUTE & CAPTURE — Do it, then record what I learned.
Layer 1: Permissions Check
Before any on-chain call, verify the caller has the required access.
| Check | Command | Pass Condition |
|---|---|---|
| Contract owner | cast call <CONTRACT> "owner()" --rpc-url <RPC> |
Returns expected deployer/admin address |
| Role-based access | cast call <CONTRACT> "hasRole(bytes32,address)" <ROLE_HASH> <CALLER> --rpc-url <RPC> |
Returns true |
| Whitelist status | cast call <CONTRACT> "isWhitelisted(address)" <CALLER> --rpc-url <RPC> |
Returns true (if applicable) |
| Token allowance | cast call <TOKEN> "allowance(address,address)" <OWNER> <SPENDER> --rpc-url <RPC> |
Returns >= required amount |
| Paused state | cast call <CONTRACT> "paused()" --rpc-url <RPC> |
Returns false |
Decision Rule
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
| All checks pass | Proceed to Layer 2 |
| Missing permission | Fix permission first (grant role / approve / unpause), then re-check |
| Unsure which permissions are needed | Read contract source — find all onlyOwner, onlyRole, require in target function |
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 291 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A 6f70f283074e
solidity-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository 0xlayerghost/solidity-agent-kit (4 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 2,715 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
web3-bug-classes
Complete reference for all 10 DeFi smart contract bug classes. Use this when hunting for specific vulnerability types, need attack patterns for accounting desync, access control, incomplete path, off-by-one, oracle manipulation, ERC4626 vaults, reentrancy, flash loans, signature replay, or proxy/upgrade bugs.
web3-methodology-research
External research synthesis from Trail of Bits, SlowMist, ConsenSys, Immunefi, and Cyfrin. Use this for advanced audit methodology, Echidna/Medusa fuzzing setup, Slither custom detector writing, attack pattern deep dives, or the 4-phase learning roadmap.
web3-poc-foundry
Complete Foundry PoC writing guide + all cheatcodes + DeFiHackLabs reproduction patterns. Use this when building a proof of concept exploit, setting up a fork test, using Foundry cheatcodes, or reproducing a known DeFi hack for learning.
web3-triage-report
Bug triage validation system, Immunefi report format, and 20 real paid bounty examples dissected. Use this when validating a finding before submitting, writing an Immunefi report, checking if a bug is actually valid, or studying real examples of paid vulnerabilities.
web3-case-study-role-misconfig
Case study - role misconfiguration bug class applied to a yield aggregator protocol. Use as a template for applying all 10 bug classes to a single target.
web3-grep-arsenal
Master grep command arsenal for Web3 smart contract auditing. Use when starting a new protocol scan, before deep code review, or when hunting specific vulnerability classes.