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/boshu2/agentops/securitynpx skills add boshu2/agentops --skill securitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boshu2/agentopsWhat 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 | $0.00036 | $0.02038 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.01019 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00408 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00204 |
Grade A, and why
security 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 2d 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 — 182 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Skill
Purpose: Run repeatable security checks across code, scripts, authorized binaries, and repo-managed prompt surfaces.
Use this skill for a caller-requested repository scan, authorized binary assurance, dependency risk, secrets, or offline prompt-surface redteam.
Critical Constraints
- Scan only repositories, binaries, and prompt surfaces the operator owns or is explicitly authorized to assess. Why: a security review does not grant access to third-party systems or proprietary material.
- Keep collection read-only by default; do not exfiltrate secrets, execute destructive payloads, or mutate policy/baselines to manufacture green. Why: the assessment must not become the incident or erase its evidence.
- Treat missing/error scanners as a coverage gap, never a clean finding; use
--require-toolswhen complete tool coverage is required. Why: absent evidence is not evidence of absence. - Use the current agent and local shell; do not start another runtime or orchestration substrate unless explicitly requested. Why: repository scanning is a bounded operation, not permission to fan out.
- Run the selected scan once and report findings plus coverage gaps. Remediation, risk acceptance, reruns, and promotion are caller decisions.
Security Surfaces
- Repository gate:
scripts/security-gate.shcomposes available scanners for quick/full/release checks. - Composable suite:
scripts/security_suite.pyprovides static, dynamic, contract, baseline, and policy primitives for authorized binaries. - Offline redteam:
scripts/prompt_redteam.pychecks repo-owned prompt and tool-control surfaces against the attack pack.
This is the canonical security runbook. Suite policy gating produces machine-consumable outputs, including policy/policy-verdict.json when a policy file is supplied.
Read the suite runbook before binary, policy, baseline, or redteam work. Use the OWASP checklist for code-level review.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 182 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A cc7068f01138
security is a skill published in the GitHub repository boshu2/agentops (431 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 2,038 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
brainstorm
Explore vague or ambitious ideas into a right-sized requirements-only plan. Use when the user wants to brainstorm, think through scope, decide what to build, or needs collaborative product framing before planning, not for a decisive verdict on whether to adopt or switch to a specific external technology, library, or…
autolearn
Compound a solved problem into a durable in-repo learning doc. Use when a verified non-trivial fix lands, the user says "compound this", "document this fix", or "remember this". This is the automatic-capture entry point; for an explicitly requested one-off write-up, use compound.
doc-review
Use when the user asks to review or critique a prose planning document — a plan, spec, PRD, requirements doc, or design doc.
audit-project
Run an iterative multi-agent code audit until critical and high findings are resolved. Use when the user says "audit my code", "find all the bugs", "deep code audit", "iterative review", or "review until clean".
commit-push-pr
Use when asked to ship/open a PR, or for PR-description-only flows like writing, rewriting, or describing a PR body.
doubt-driven
Doubt-driven adversarial review. Use when correctness matters more than speed, the code is unfamiliar, stakes are high, a claim can't be checked by the type system or compiler, or verifying now is cheaper than debugging later.