Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to GetKlai/klai. 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/GetKlai/klai/main/.agents/skills/audit-context-building/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GetKlai/klaiWrote 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/getklai/klai/audit-context-building)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/getklai/klai/audit-context-building"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getklai/klai/audit-context-building/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/getklai/klai/audit-context-building"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getklai/klai/audit-context-building.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 | $0.00055 | $0.00867 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00347 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00173 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00087 |
Grade A, and why
audit-context-building 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 1mo 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Audit Context Building
Build understanding, not verdicts. This runs before anyone hunts for bugs, and feeds that work.
When to Use
At the start of an audit, a threat model, or an architecture review, when the code is unfamiliar. Also when an earlier pass produced findings nobody could judge, because no one had mapped out how the system fits together.
When NOT to Use
Do not name vulnerabilities, suggest fixes, write proofs-of-concept, or rate severity. Those belong to the hunting phase, which runs next and with the whole picture in hand. When the code counts on something and nothing checks it, record that plainly and move on — whether it matters is decided later.
Not worth the tokens on code you already understand.
Do not analyze in this context
The analysis is long, and this context needs to survive to use it. Dispatch it:
- A codebase, or more than one function — run
/audit-context-building:audit-context <path>. It orients, analyzes each function in its own subagent, and writesaudit-context/DOSSIER.mdplus one file per function underaudit-context/functions/. Only compact records return here. - A single function — dispatch the
audit-context-building:function-analyzeragent at it. It writes its prose to disk and returns a record.
Then work from what comes back: the index, the unenforced assumptions, the open questions. Read a function's file when you need its detail.
The workflow is what enforces this, not this text: a subagent bound to a return schema cannot return prose. Treat this section as routing, and route.
What comes back, and how to read it
Each record lists what must always be true (with the line that shows it), what the function takes on faith (with whatever establishes it), which functions it calls and what it needs from each, and anything still unclear. The dossier adds the rules that span several functions, who can reach what, and where the complicated parts cluster.
Two things matter more than the rest:
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 73 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 222efa737435
audit-context-building is a skill published in the GitHub repository GetKlai/klai (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 867 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…