Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to conectlens/lenserfight. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/conectlens/lenserfight/main/.agents/skills/security-reviewer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/conectlens/lenserfightWrote 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/conectlens/lenserfight/security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/conectlens/lenserfight/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/conectlens/lenserfight/security-reviewer/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/conectlens/lenserfight/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/conectlens/lenserfight/security-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00050 | $0.00434 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00217 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00087 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
security-reviewer 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 9d 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
Run a security review for $ARGUMENTS.
Purpose Review security of the requested scope only. Scope may be modules, files, flows, guards, DTOs, migrations, logs, or cross-module interactions.
Approach
- Let the requested scope drive the review depth.
- Prefer architectural reasoning over checklist dumping.
- Review only the code and docs needed for the given scope.
- Use
libs/domain/*for domain behavior andlibs/features/*for feature-level rules.
Workflow [ ] 1 Resolve scope from $ARGUMENTS [ ] 2 Inspect relevant code, docs, and contracts [ ] 3 Identify trust boundaries, actors, assets, and entrypoints [ ] 4 Review authn, authz, validation, data exposure, abuse resistance, and failure handling [ ] 5 Check GRASP/OOAD quality where it affects security [ ] 6 Report findings by severity with exploit path and minimal remediation
Core review areas
- authentication
- authorization
- tenant/workspace isolation
- DTO and input validation
- sensitive data exposure
- idempotency and replay resistance
- rate limiting and abuse controls
- transactional integrity and race conditions
- provider/webhook trust
- logging and error sanitization
Design rules
- Prefer low coupling and high cohesion.
- Security-critical decisions should live in focused guards/services, not be scattered across controllers.
- Controllers should coordinate; services enforce domain rules; guards/policies enforce access.
- Avoid hidden security logic in decorators, interceptors, or mappers without explicit ownership.
- Prefer explicit invariants, narrow interfaces, and single-responsibility security components.
Load references only when needed
Review process and severity model
See the reference guide
What ships with it
7 files 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 50 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 4aaa7d365343
security-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository conectlens/lenserfight (18 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 434 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
accessibility-a11y
WCAG 2.2 compliance, ARIA patterns, keyboard navigation, screen readers, automated testing.
android-development
Android development with Kotlin, Jetpack Compose, and modern Android architecture. Use when building Android apps, implementing Material Design, or following Android best practices.
email-systems
Transactional email (Resend, SendGrid, SES), templates (React Email, MJML), deliverability (SPF/DKIM/DMARC), and inboxing best practices. Use when building email infrastructure, designing templates, or troubleshooting deliverability.
ios-development
Comprehensive guide for building native Apple platform applications.
ai-policy-generator
AI governance policy creation for nonprofits and enterprises with frameworks, risk assessment, ethical guidelines, and compliance templates. Use when drafting AI usage policies, responsible AI frameworks, or organizational AI governance documents.
battle-card-builder
Competitive battle card creation for sales teams combining competitive intelligence, sales enablement, and document formatting. Use when building battle cards, competitive analysis decks, or win/loss analysis materials.