headcount is an organization of independently installable Claude Code plugins, each grouping skills for a department such as finance, security, or demand generation. Claude Code users install the departments they need and invoke their skills for specialized work; the catalogue entries are skills and related agent tooling from that organization.
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 cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcountWrote 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/cbrock84/headcount/security-architecture-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cbrock84/headcount/security-architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cbrock84/headcount/security-architecture-review/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/cbrock84/headcount/security-architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cbrock84/headcount/security-architecture-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00078 | $0.00869 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00434 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00174 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00087 |
Grade A, and why
security-architecture-review 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 5d 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security architecture review
Review in this order
Attention spent in this order finds the most consequential problems first.
1. Authentication. How identity is established, how sessions are represented, how they expire, what happens on password reset and account recovery. Recovery flows are the most commonly weakest path into an account and the least reviewed.
2. Authorization. The one that matters most and gets least attention. For every endpoint and every object: who is allowed, and where is that checked? The characteristic failure is checking on the way in but not on the object itself, so any authenticated user can reach any record by changing an identifier.
Check multi-tenant isolation explicitly and by test, not by reading. Assume every identifier in a request is attacker-controlled, because it is.
3. Data. What is collected, where it goes, where it rests, and who can read it. Sensitive data in logs, in error responses, in analytics payloads, and in client bundles — all four are routine findings.
4. Input and output. Untrusted input reaching a query, a template, a command, a deserializer, or a URL the server fetches. Parameterize rather than escape. Validate against an allowlist rather than a denylist.
5. Secrets. Never in source, never in client bundles, never in build logs. Rotatable, scoped to what needs them, and with a documented rotation path that someone has actually walked.
6. Dependencies and supply chain. What is pulled in, how it is pinned, how updates are reviewed, and what would happen if a maintainer account were compromised. Lockfiles committed, builds reproducible.
Reviewing a change rather than a design
Look for: new endpoints without an authorization check, new external input, changed authentication or session logic, new dependencies, anything touching cryptography, and anything that widens what a role can do. Everything else is usually lower yield.
Never write your own cryptography. Use the vetted primitives, and be suspicious of any diff that implements a comparison, a token, or a signature by hand.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 79 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 05f94936d09d
security-architecture-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cbrock84/headcount (1,320 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 869 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
guidance
Authoritative guidance for building Claude Code skills, agents, and plugins, vendored into this repository. Use when you need the rules or best practices for a skill, agent, hook, or plugin — designing, reviewing, hardening, or checking one against the guidance. Does not run an interview to build a new skill or agent…
code-quality
Use when validating code quality after modifications -- SOLID compliance, DRY duplication, linter errors, architecture violations. Do NOT use for functional verification (run verification FIRST, then code-quality).
phase-preview
Preview a signed-off design one release phase at a time — cut it down into a series of phase screens, each showing only what exists by that phase with the layout untouched, then put them on a scrubber you drag to watch the screen fill in release by release. Use when the user wants a Phase 1 / MVP version of an…
radin-review
Run a thermo-nuclear code quality review over a scope (commit, PR, directory, or a range like "since yesterday") and log each finding as a backlog entry instead of printing to terminal. Use for /radin-review, "review and log to backlog", "audit this commit/PR/directory and file backlog entries", "turn this review into…
hermes-agent-compatibility
Audit Socket-to-Hermes compatibility across Agent Skills, Codex plugins, MCP, hooks, apps, agents, and Hermes extension systems. Use for skill exports, config translations, and Hermes adapter decisions.
ci-workflow
Design and maintain .NET CI workflows for F#, C#, and mixed solutions with SDK setup, restore, build, test, format checks, package checks, caching, and matrix decisions.