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/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/security-scan-assistantnpx skills add AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards --skill security-scan-assistantgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standardsWrote 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/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/security-scan-assistant)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/security-scan-assistant"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/security-scan-assistant.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 5.1 | $0.00133 | $0.00916 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00067 | $0.00458 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00183 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
scan 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 6d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 78 lines · 133 tokens per session scan A 4a694e5f7998
scan is a skill published in the GitHub repository AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards (73 stars, last pushed yesterday), with no licence file. It adds 133 tokens to every session and 916 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
review-ticket
Review a ticket or PR through focused specialist lenses: scope, architecture, security, tests, AC coverage, and PR metadata.
common-feedback-reporter
Pre-write audit for skill violations: checks planned code against loaded skill anti-patterns before any file write. Use when writing Flutter/Dart/TS code or editing SKILL.md files with active project skills. Load as composite; on auto-fixed violation, also load +common/common-learning-log.
code-review
Run an AI-assisted PR code review using multi-layer lenses with confidence scoring.
review-system-design
Review a system design someone else provided - screenshot, drawio, Mermaid, slides, doc, or IaC - by extracting it into a confirmed fact sheet, then scoring it on the nine axes.
common-code-review
Conduct high-quality, persona-driven code reviews. Use when reviewing PRs, critiquing code quality, or analyzing changes for team feedback.
common-owasp
OWASP Top 10 audit checklists for Web Applications (2021), APIs (2023), and Mobile (2024). Use when performing any security review, PR review, or codebase audit touching web, mobile, or API code.