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 fredrikaverpil/dotfiles --skill codebase-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fredrikaverpil/dotfilesWrote 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/fredrikaverpil/dotfiles/codebase-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fredrikaverpil/dotfiles/codebase-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fredrikaverpil/dotfiles/codebase-audit/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/fredrikaverpil/dotfiles/codebase-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fredrikaverpil/dotfiles/codebase-audit.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Agent Snooping · line 1 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00119 | $0.02570 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00048 | $0.01028 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00514 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00257 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-audit 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 today.
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 — 300 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codebase Audit
Analyze the current git repository's history to produce a structured health report covering churn, ownership, bugs, momentum, and firefighting patterns.
Goal
Produce a structured markdown report with one section per dimension, including raw data (top files/contributors) and observations. The report should help the reader orient themselves in an unfamiliar codebase and identify risk areas before reading code.
Steps
Steps 1a-1e are independent — run them in parallel, then synthesize in step 2.
0. Detect GitHub availability
Before starting the analysis, check whether the repo is GitHub-hosted and gh
is authenticated:
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner 2>/dev/null
If this succeeds, set a mental flag that GitHub enrichments are available. If it
fails (not a GitHub repo, or gh not authenticated), skip all gh-prefixed
sub-steps below and rely on git-only analysis. Do not warn or apologize — just
use what's available.
1a. High-Churn Files
1a-i. Raw churn
git log --format=format: --name-only --since="1 year ago" | grep . | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head -20
Report the top 20 most-modified files in the past year. Flag any file that appears disproportionately often -- this is the clearest signal of codebase drag.
1a-ii. De-noised churn
Lockfiles, generated output and vendored trees dominate raw churn without telling you anything about the code. If 5 or more of the top 10 are noise of this kind, run a filtered second pass:
NOISE='(^|/)([^/]*-lock\.(json|yaml)|[^/]*\.lock|package\.json|go\.sum|CHANGELOG\.md|[^/]*\.snap)$|(^|/)(__snapshots__|dist|build|coverage|generated|vendor|node_modules|\.terraform)/'
git log --format=format: --name-only --since="1 year ago" | grep . | grep -vE "$NOISE" | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head -20
Extend $NOISE with repo-specific paths when the filtered pass is still
dominated by bulk content (docs/, locales/, i18n/). Label that as a
repo-specific pass, separate from the generic de-noising above.
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.
- today Changed · +299 lines · +119 tokens per session 40139f24530c
- 1mo ago First seen · 1 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e6ec1a36f15a
codebase-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository fredrikaverpil/dotfiles (260 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 119 tokens to every session and 2,570 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Use when the user wants to create a new pull request, update an existing PR's body, open a draft PR, or preview a PR body locally before pushing.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation.
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements.
standards
Check current work against the shared user-level coding standards.
explain-changes
Explain how the code on the current branch works, as an HTML page opened in the browser, written so someone can understand the change and review it. Use when asked to explain a branch, explain these changes, walk me through this code, help me review this, or explain what an agent just did. Most useful when someone…
coding-best-practices
Reviews macOS Swift 6+ code for modern idioms, SOLID principles, SwiftData patterns, and concurrency best practices. Use when reviewing macOS code quality or asking about best practices.