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/aibier/claude-em-toolkit/defensive-programmingnpx skills add Aibier/claude-em-toolkit --skill defensive-programminggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aibier/claude-em-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/skills/aibier/claude-em-toolkit/defensive-programming)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aibier/claude-em-toolkit/defensive-programming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aibier/claude-em-toolkit/defensive-programming.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 | $0.00055 | $0.00757 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00378 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00151 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
defensive-programming 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 3d 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 — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Defensive Programming at Trust Boundaries
The discipline of defending code where it actually matters — system boundaries — without smothering internal code in redundant checks. Over- defending is its own bug: it hides real failures, balloons code for no safety gain, and makes intent harder to read.
Steps
-
Identify the actual trust boundaries first. Defense belongs at the edges where untrusted data enters: user input, external API responses, file/network/DB reads, deserialized payloads, environment/config. Code that only ever receives data already validated by an internal caller does not need to re-validate — trust your own contracts.
-
At each boundary, check for the OWASP-class basics relevant to it:
- Injection (SQL/command/template/log) — use parameterized queries, never string-concatenate untrusted input into commands or queries
- Deserialization — validate shape/type before trusting structure;
never
eval/deserialize untrusted data into executable form - Auth/access — verify identity and authorization at the boundary, not just one or the other
- Resource exhaustion — bound input size, recursion depth, request rates where the boundary is externally reachable
- Secrets — never log, echo, or include credentials/tokens in error messages or traces that might reach untrusted eyes
-
Fail safely and legibly:
- Reject invalid input with a clear error at the boundary — don't let malformed data silently propagate inward and fail confusingly later
- Don't swallow exceptions into empty catch blocks — that converts a loud, diagnosable failure into a silent, undebuggable one
- Error messages to untrusted callers should not leak internals (stack traces, query structure, file paths); detailed diagnostics belong in logs
-
Don't defend against the impossible. Validating internal function arguments that the type system or an internal contract already guarantees is noise — it adds code, obscures the real boundary checks, and signals "I don't trust my own code," which erodes the value of having contracts at all. If you find yourself validating the same thing at every layer, that's a sign the check belongs at the boundary, once.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 68 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 07ca93c9f3ed
defensive-programming is a skill published in the GitHub repository Aibier/claude-em-toolkit (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 757 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…