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/codexstar69/bug-hunter/security-reviewnpx skills add codexstar69/bug-hunter --skill security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/codexstar69/bug-hunterWhat 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 | $0.00057 | $0.00495 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00247 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
security-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 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.
What it actually says
Security Review
This is a bundled local Bug Hunter companion skill. It packages a security-focused review workflow without introducing any external marketplace dependency.
Purpose
Use this skill for deeper security audits than a simple bug hunt, especially when the user wants:
- a full security review
- PR security validation
- weekly security scanning
- dependency reachability + code review together
- threat-model-driven analysis
Workflow
-
Ensure
.bug-hunter/threat-model.mdexists.- If missing, invoke the bundled
threat-model-generationskill.
- If missing, invoke the bundled
-
Determine the scan mode from the request:
- PR → diff-scoped review via
commit-security-scan - staged → staged-only security review
- weekly → recent commit range on the default branch
- full → full repository security audit
- PR → diff-scoped review via
-
If dependency scanning is relevant, run:
node scripts/dep-scan.cjs --target <path> --output .bug-hunter/dep-findings.json
-
Scan code for STRIDE threats using Bug Hunter-native conventions. Reuse:
.bug-hunter/triage.json.bug-hunter/threat-model.md.bug-hunter/security-config.json.bug-hunter/dep-findings.json
-
Validate severe findings using the bundled
vulnerability-validationskill. -
Produce structured outputs compatible with the Bug Hunter pipeline.
Outputs
Primary artifacts should stay inside .bug-hunter/:
.bug-hunter/hunter-findings.json.bug-hunter/referee.json.bug-hunter/report.md.bug-hunter/dep-findings.jsonwhen dependency review is enabled.bug-hunter/fix-strategy.jsonif the user wants remediation planning
Important constraints
- Keep all paths Bug Hunter-native; do not emit
.factory/*artifacts. - Prefer validated, exploitability-aware findings over raw volume.
- For patching requests, hand findings back to the normal Bug Hunter fix pipeline rather than inventing a second patch system.
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 · 58 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A b49af0423c54
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository codexstar69/bug-hunter (501 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 495 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
logic-review
Find logic bugs in a single file or function via semi-formal execution tracing (Premises → Trace → Divergence → Trigger → Remedy). Trigger when a user shares code and suspects something is wrong without naming a concrete failure — phrases like "review this", "does this look right", "check this function", "audit this…
logic-fix-all
Autonomous repository-wide audit-and-fix pipeline: health → review → locate/explain → fix → diff-verify → iterate until clean. Starts with a mandatory consent prompt (token-intensive); after consent runs hands-free. Trigger when the user wants ALL logic issues found and fixed — "fix everything", "fix all logic…
run-iteration-eval
Run the Logic-Lens content-eval pipeline for one iteration and produce a scored summary.json — use to measure a skill change. Wraps scripts/run-content-evals.sh (runner, costs tokens) and scripts/grade-iteration.py (grader, free, re-runnable). ALWAYS sync the plugin cache first. Use when the user wants to "run the…
logic-health
Sweep a directory, module, or full codebase for logic correctness and produce a scored health dashboard with systemic patterns. Trigger when the user requests a health view — "audit the whole codebase", "health check", "health overview", "logic health overview", "audit src/", "audit auth and payments modules", "where…
new-skill
Scaffold a new logic- skill in the Logic-Lens repo and wire it into every place a skill must be registered, so no step is missed. Use when adding a seventh (or later) skill to Logic-Lens.
sync-skill-cache
Sync the Logic-Lens working-copy skills/ into the installed plugin cache so content-evals test the EDITED skill, not the last published one. ALWAYS run this after editing any skills//SKILL.md or guide/shared file and BEFORE running content-evals — otherwise the eval silently grades stale content and every token is…