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 ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE --skill critical-interval-security-checkergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SEWrote 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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/critical-interval-security-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/critical-interval-security-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/critical-interval-security-checker/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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/critical-interval-security-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/critical-interval-security-checker.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 3 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Privilege Escalation · line 106 Code accesses credential files (SSH keys, AWS credentials, etc.). This could indicate credential theft attempts.Fix: Remove references to credential paths. Use environment variables or secrets managers. For docs, use placeholder paths (e.g., /path/to/config). Never load .env or token files in production code paths.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 53 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Tool Misuse · line 211 Tool defaults are unsafe or overly permissive (e.g. disabled TLS verification, no authentication, world-writable permissions). Unsafe defaults widen the attack surface.Fix: Override unsafe defaults with secure settings (verify=True, auth required, restrictive permissions). Review and harden all tool configurations.
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 | $0.00123 | $0.01668 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00062 | $0.00834 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00334 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00167 |
Grade A, and why
critical-interval-security-checker 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 12d 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 — 273 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Critical Interval Security Checker
Analyze code to identify security-critical time intervals and timing vulnerabilities that could compromise security.
Workflow
1. Identify Security-Critical Operations
Look for code that handles:
- Authentication: Login, logout, token generation
- Session management: Session creation, validation, expiration
- Password operations: Reset tokens, change requests
- Rate limiting: Login attempts, API calls, password resets
- Token operations: JWT, OAuth tokens, API keys
- MFA: OTP codes, push notifications, backup codes
2. Check for Common Vulnerabilities
See vulnerability_patterns.md for detailed patterns.
Critical checks:
- Missing expiration validation
- Excessive timeout values
- No rate limiting on sensitive endpoints
- Client-side only expiration checks
- Race conditions in expiration logic
- Hardcoded timeout values
- Inconsistent timeout enforcement
- Timezone handling issues
- Timing attack vulnerabilities
3. Use Automated Checker
Run the automated checker script:
# Check single file
python scripts/check_intervals.py path/to/file.py
# Check entire directory
python scripts/check_intervals.py src/
# Specify language
python scripts/check_intervals.py src/ --language python
The script detects:
- 🔴 Critical: JWT decode without verification, timing attacks
- 🟠 High: Missing expiration checks, no rate limiting
- 🟡 Medium: Excessive timeouts, inconsistent enforcement
- 🔵 Low: Hardcoded timeouts, magic numbers
4. Manual Code Review
For each security-critical operation, verify:
Expiration is set:
# Good: Expiration set
token_expiry = datetime.utcnow() + timedelta(hours=1)
Expiration is checked:
# Good: Expiration validated
if datetime.utcnow() > token_expiry:
raise TokenExpiredError()
Timeout is reasonable:
# Good: 1-hour reset token
RESET_TOKEN_EXPIRY = timedelta(hours=1)
# Bad: 7-day reset token (too long!)
RESET_TOKEN_EXPIRY = timedelta(days=7)
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 273 lines · 123 tokens per session scan A af396e21f3cd
critical-interval-security-checker is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE (252 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 123 tokens to every session and 1,668 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
refactor-advisor
A code review helper that finds common design and maintenance problems in a codebase and suggests ways to restructure the code.
pair-programming
A coding partner that writes code and then reviews that code for correctness, security, speed, readability, and reliability. It focuses on issues that can appear in AI-generated code, such as invented APIs or quietly changed requirements.
apply-findings
Apply findings by making the suggested code changes. Applies accepted verdicts, escalates ambiguous findings to the user, and offers to note genuine improvements for later. Use when the user asks to "apply findings", "apply fixes", "apply suggestions", "apply accepted findings", "fix the findings", or "apply the…
java-code-review
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
simplify-all
Run the code and documentation simplification passes together over one scope, launching every review agent concurrently before applying a single round of fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify all", "simplify everything", "simplify code and docs", "clean up code and docs", "run both simplify skills", or "simplify…