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 DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbow --skill code-security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbowWrote 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/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/code-security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/code-security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/code-security-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/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/code-security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/code-security-review.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 | $0.00145 | $0.01721 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.00860 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00344 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00172 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 234 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Security Review
Overview
Performs comprehensive security code reviews to identify vulnerabilities, assess security risks, and provide actionable remediation guidance. Covers OWASP Top 10, CWE classifications, compliance requirements, and security best practices.
Security Review Workflow
1. Initial Assessment
Gather context about the application:
- Application type: Web app, API, mobile, desktop, embedded
- Data sensitivity: PII, financial data, healthcare records, proprietary information
- Compliance requirements: PCI-DSS, GDPR, HIPAA, SOC 2, ISO 27001
- Authentication mechanisms: OAuth, JWT, session-based, API keys
- Technology stack: Languages, frameworks, libraries, databases
- External integrations: Third-party APIs, cloud services, payment processors
Perform threat modeling:
- Identify critical assets (data, functions, resources)
- Map attack surfaces (user inputs, APIs, file uploads, network interfaces)
- Determine threat actors (external attackers, malicious insiders, automated bots)
- Assess existing security controls
2. Code Analysis
Systematically review code for security vulnerabilities:
Priority Areas:
- Authentication & Authorization - Login flows, session management, access controls
- Input Validation - All user inputs, API parameters, file uploads
- Data Protection - Encryption at rest and in transit, sensitive data handling
- API Security - Rate limiting, authentication, input validation
- Dependency Security - Third-party libraries, outdated packages, known CVEs
- Configuration - Security headers, CORS, environment variables, secrets management
- Error Handling - Information disclosure, stack traces, error messages
- Business Logic - Race conditions, workflow bypasses, state manipulation
3. Vulnerability Classification
Classify each finding:
- Severity: Critical, High, Medium, Low, Informational
- CWE ID: Common Weakness Enumeration identifier
- OWASP Category: Map to OWASP Top 10 if applicable
- CVSS Score: Calculate if applicable (use CVSS 3.1)
- Exploitability: How easy to exploit
- Impact: Data loss, privilege escalation, DoS, data breach
What ships with it
4 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 · 234 lines · 145 tokens per session scan A c36b67cf510c
code-security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbow (16 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 145 tokens to every session and 1,721 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
spec-driven-development
Spec-first workflow where an executable, testable specification is written before code and becomes the single source of truth that tests verify against, flowing spec → acceptance criteria → tasks → implementation.
ospec-change
Create or advance a lightweight OSpec change using the classic fast workflow.
artifact-conventions
Defines preservation, format, and section rules for SDD specification artifacts (spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md, checklists). Use when editing feature-artifact files under specs/ / to prevent accidental corruption of cross-referenced IDs, priorities, and gating state.
plan-authoring
Reference material for writing implementation plans (technical context, architecture decisions, data models, API contracts, project-instructions alignment). Loaded on demand by plan-feature; not directly invokable.
task-generation
Reference material with the canonical task-format grammar and decomposition rules for plan-to-tasks expansion. Loaded on demand by generate-tasks; not directly invokable.
adr-authoring
Defines the canonical MADR format, lifecycle rules, numbering policy, and SAD catalog contract for standalone ADRs under specs/adrs/.