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/auerbachb/claude-code-config/harness-auditnpx skills add auerbachb/claude-code-config --skill harness-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/auerbachb/claude-code-configWrote 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/auerbachb/claude-code-config/harness-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/auerbachb/claude-code-config/harness-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/auerbachb/claude-code-config/harness-audit.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 | $0.00073 | $0.08137 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.04068 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01627 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00814 |
Grade A, and why
harness-audit 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 4d 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 — 671 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
harness-audit — is the harness already doing this?
Our automation only ever grows. Nothing in the workflow ever asks "does Claude Code do this natively now?" — so redundant rules accumulate, crowd out the ones that still earn their place under the word budget, and eventually read as deliberate because they have sat there so long.
This skill is that missing question, run on a schedule.
Resolve the repository locator before either pass:
resolve_script() {
local name="$1" candidate
for candidate in \
"$HOME/.claude/skills-worktree/.claude/scripts/$name" \
"$HOME/.claude/scripts/$name" \
".claude/scripts/$name"; do
if [[ -x "$candidate" ]]; then echo "$candidate"; return 0; fi
done
return 1
}
REPO_ROOT_SH=$(resolve_script repo-root.sh || true)
[[ -n "$REPO_ROOT_SH" ]] || { echo "ERROR: repo-root.sh not found (checked all three paths) — harness inventory root unavailable" >&2; exit 1; }
ADVISORY ONLY — NON-NEGOTIABLE. This skill never edits, deletes, moves, or rewrites a rule, skill, script, or hook. Not even an obviously-dead one. Not even when the verdict is unambiguous. Its entire output surface is a report plus GitHub issues. A human reads the verdicts and lands the change through the normal issue → branch → PR flow. If you catch yourself reaching for Edit/Write on an audited artifact, stop — that is the one thing this skill is not allowed to do.
The two-pass shape (and why)
| Pass | Cost | Model | What it does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inventory | Cheap — one script | Whatever is running | Enumerate every artifact. No judgment. |
| Judgment | Expensive — live research + per-artifact reasoning | Top tier, resolved at run time | Read current harness behavior, verdict each artifact, file issues. |
The split exists because of a real constraint. subagent-orchestration.md reserves
the top tier for interactive step-ups where a human watches the spend — it is
never a spawn default. A monthly tick that quietly burns top-tier tokens
unattended contradicts that rule's stated harm model, not merely its wording. So
the recurring tick runs only the cheap pass and then offers the judgment pass
as a click-to-launch chip. Nobody's budget moves without a human clicking.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 671 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 5efb769b6203
harness-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository auerbachb/claude-code-config (5 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 8,137 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
fixer
Surgical code fixer for Bug Hunter. Implements minimal, precise fixes for verified bugs. Uses doc-lookup (Context Hub + Context7) to verify correct API usage in patches. Respects fix strategy classifications (safe-autofix vs manual-review vs larger-refactor).
referee
Final arbiter for Bug Hunter. Receives Hunter findings and Skeptic challenges, independently re-reads code, and delivers authoritative verdicts with CVSS scoring and proof-of-concept generation for security findings.
do-competitively
Execute tasks through competitive multi-agent generation, meta-judge evaluation specification, multi-judge evaluation, and evidence-based synthesis.
adr
Create and manage Architecture Decision Records. Documents significant technical decisions with context, alternatives, and consequences. Also supports evaluate (assess proposals) and design (system design) modes.
deploy-checklist
Pre-deployment verification checklist. Generates customized checklists based on tech-stack with rollback triggers. Auto-invoked by /draft:upload.
judge-with-debate
Evaluate solutions through multi-round debate between independent judges until consensus.