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 design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard --skill security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboardWrote 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/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard/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/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard/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 | $0.00019 | $0.00258 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00103 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00052 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00026 |
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 7d 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
Security-first review workflow for this repository.
When to Use
- Before any commit touching auth, payments, user data
- Before merging PRs
- When reviewing external API calls or form submissions
- During security audits
Pre-Commit Checklist
- No hardcoded secrets (API keys, passwords, tokens)
- All user inputs validated
- SQL injection prevention (parameterized queries)
- XSS prevention (sanitized HTML)
- CSRF protection enabled
- Authentication/authorization verified
- Rate limiting on endpoints
- Error messages don't leak sensitive data
React/Next.js Specific
- No dangerouslySetInnerHTML with unsanitized input
- No javascript: or unsafe data: URLs
- External links use rel="noopener noreferrer"
- Server Actions validate all inputs
- No secrets in NEXTPUBLIC* env vars
- Source maps disabled or uploaded to error tracker in production
Response Protocol
If a critical issue is found:
- STOP immediately
- Document the issue
- Fix before continuing
- Rotate any exposed secrets
- Review entire codebase for similar issues
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 46 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 152b4f88dcfe
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository design-sparx/mantine-analytics-dashboard (387 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 258 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-24.
Other skills, from other repositories
codebase-review
Review an entire codebase for architecture, engineering health, and exploitable risk; generate a prioritized remediation plan, an evidence-anchored system knowledge document, or both.
review-system-design
Review a system design someone else provided - screenshot, drawio, Mermaid, slides, doc, or IaC - by extracting it into a confirmed fact sheet, then scoring it on the nine axes.
code-review
Run an AI-assisted PR code review using multi-layer lenses with confidence scoring.
review-ticket
Review a ticket or PR through focused specialist lenses: scope, architecture, security, tests, AC coverage, and PR metadata.
common-feedback-reporter
Pre-write audit for skill violations: checks planned code against loaded skill anti-patterns before any file write. Use when writing Flutter/Dart/TS code or editing SKILL.md files with active project skills. Load as composite; on auto-fixed violation, also load +common/common-learning-log.
common-code-review
Conduct high-quality, persona-driven code reviews. Use when reviewing PRs, critiquing code quality, or analyzing changes for team feedback.