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 skills add allsmog/vuln-scout --skill verify-findinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/allsmog/vuln-scoutWrote 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/allsmog/vuln-scout/verify-finding)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/allsmog/vuln-scout/verify-finding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/allsmog/vuln-scout/verify-finding/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/skills/allsmog/vuln-scout/verify-finding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/allsmog/vuln-scout/verify-finding.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00263 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00131 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00053 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
verify-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 9d 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
Verify Finding
Use this task skill when the user asks to verify VSCOUT-*, asks whether a finding is exploitable, or asks to confirm a specific finding.
Workflow
- Locate the finding by ID, stable key, or
file:linein.claude/findings.json. - Run
/vuln-scout:traceon the source-to-sink path. - Run
/vuln-scout:verifyfor CPG-backed confirmation. - Call
false-positive-verifierwhen controls, sanitizers, or reachability are unclear. - Call
local-testeronly when dynamic validation is explicitly safe and useful. - Run
/vuln-scout:propagatewhen a confirmed pattern may repeat. - Update
.claude/review-ledger.jsonwith the final verification state.
Produces
- Updated
.claude/review-ledger.jsonentry - optional trace artifact
When NOT To Trigger
Do not trigger for broad scans, PR review, generic exploitability education, dangerous-function lists, or CPG query syntax questions that do not name a finding.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 28 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A e49be4011dc1
verify-finding is a skill published in the GitHub repository allsmog/vuln-scout (24 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 263 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
sast-config
Reviews and tunes SAST tool configurations against OWASP ASVS 4.0.3 and CWE Top 25. Auto-invoked when reviewing Semgrep rules, CodeQL queries, SAST CI integration, or false positive triage workflows. Produces a SAST maturity assessment covering rule authoring, severity tuning, custom rule development, and CI…
sast-semgrep
Static application security testing (SAST) using Semgrep for vulnerability detection, security code review, and secure coding guidance with OWASP and CWE framework mapping. Use when: (1) Scanning code for security vulnerabilities across multiple languages, (2) Performing security code reviews with pattern-based…
sast-semgrep
Static application security testing (SAST) using Semgrep for vulnerability detection, security code review, and secure coding guidance with OWASP and CWE framework mapping. Use when: (1) Scanning code for security vulnerabilities across multiple languages, (2) Performing security code reviews with pattern-based…
implementing-devsecops-security-scanning
Integrates Static Application Security Testing (SAST), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), and Software Composition Analysis (SCA) into CI/CD pipelines using open-source tools. Covers Semgrep for SAST, Trivy for SCA and container scanning, OWASP ZAP for DAST, and Gitleaks for secrets detection. Activates for…
integrating-sast-into-github-actions-pipeline
This skill covers integrating Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools—CodeQL and Semgrep—into GitHub Actions CI/CD pipelines. It addresses configuring automated code scanning on pull requests and pushes, tuning rules to reduce false positives, uploading SARIF results to GitHub Advanced Security, and…
implementing-semgrep-for-custom-sast-rules
Write custom Semgrep SAST rules in YAML to detect application-specific vulnerabilities, enforce coding standards, and integrate into CI/CD pipelines.