Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server. 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/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/main/.claude/skills/security-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-serverWrote 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/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/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/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server/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 | $0.00149 | $0.02058 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00060 | $0.00823 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00412 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00206 |
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 yesterday.
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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- security-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- security-review — 100% identical, 8 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 169 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Review
An AI-powered security scanner that reasons about your codebase the way a human security researcher would — tracing data flows, understanding component interactions, and catching vulnerabilities that pattern-matching tools miss.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when the request involves:
- Scanning a codebase or file for security vulnerabilities
- Running a security review or vulnerability check
- Checking for SQL injection, XSS, command injection, or other injection flaws
- Finding exposed API keys, hardcoded secrets, or credentials in code
- Auditing dependencies for known CVEs
- Reviewing authentication, authorization, or access control logic
- Detecting insecure cryptography or weak randomness
- Performing a data flow analysis to trace user input to dangerous sinks
- Any request phrasing like "is my code secure?", "scan this file", or "check my repo for vulnerabilities"
- Running
/security-reviewor/security-review <path>
How This Skill Works
Unlike traditional static analysis tools that match patterns, this skill:
- Reads code like a security researcher — understanding context, intent, and data flow
- Traces across files — following how user input moves through your application
- Self-verifies findings — re-examines each result to filter false positives
- Assigns severity ratings — CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / INFO
- Proposes targeted patches — every finding includes a concrete fix
- Requires human approval — nothing is auto-applied; you always review first
Execution Workflow
Follow these steps in order every time:
Step 1 — Scope Resolution
Determine what to scan:
- If a path was provided (
/security-review src/auth/), scan only that scope - If no path given, scan the entire project starting from the root
- Identify the language(s) and framework(s) in use (check package.json, requirements.txt, go.mod, Cargo.toml, pom.xml, Gemfile, composer.json, etc.)
- Read
references/language-patterns.mdto load language-specific vulnerability patterns
What ships with it
5 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.
- yesterday First seen · 169 lines · 149 tokens per session scan A 002392d88637
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository docdyhr/simplenote-mcp-server (21 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 149 tokens to every session and 2,058 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-10-21.
Other skills, from other repositories
api-integration-architect
Design, implement, debug, and optimize API integrations with expert-level patterns for REST, GraphQL, webhooks, and authentication flows.
authentication-patterns
Authentication patterns: session vs JWT vs OAuth comparison, provider selection (NextAuth, Clerk, Supabase Auth), security checklist, and common mistakes. Use when implementing auth, reviewing auth flows, or choosing auth providers.
api-shape-explorer
Generate multiple radically different interface designs for a module using parallel sub-agents. Use when user wants to design an API, explore interface options, compare module shapes, or mentions "design it twice".
offensive-api-abuse
Advanced API exploitation methodology focused on business logic abuse and sophisticated attack patterns that bypass traditional security controls. Covers business logic bypass through API call chaining and workflow manipulation. Addresses GraphQL-specific attacks including batching for credential brute-force, query…
fastcrud
Use when building or modifying CRUD endpoints with FastCRUD (the fastcrud PyPI package) in a FastAPI project — covers FastCRUD, crudrouter, EndpointCreator, FilterConfig, JoinConfig, auto-relationship detection, the filter operator syntax (gte, in, ilike, etc.), cursor pagination, soft delete, and how to avoid N+1…
api-testing-patterns
Comprehensive API testing patterns including contract testing, REST/GraphQL testing, and integration testing. Use when testing APIs or designing API test strategies.