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 agentmods add skills/hoatv2211/gamestudio-codexkit/lua-client-server-contract-auditnpx skills add hoatv2211/GameStudio-CodexKIT --skill lua-client-server-contract-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoatv2211/GameStudio-CodexKITWrote 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/hoatv2211/gamestudio-codexkit/lua-client-server-contract-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoatv2211/gamestudio-codexkit/lua-client-server-contract-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoatv2211/gamestudio-codexkit/lua-client-server-contract-audit.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00036 | $0.00770 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00385 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00154 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
lua-client-server-contract-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 4d 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Lua Client Server Contract Audit
Overview
Compare normalized client and server protocol contracts without editing either copy, then identify missing packets, opcode drift, field drift, and authority ambiguity.
When to use
Use for Lua packet failures, RPC mismatch, silent request drops, wrong opcodes, missing response fields, duplicated protocol tables, or client/server copy drift.
When NOT to use
Do not use for translation text authority, generic localization keys, or runtime network capture that requires service control or credentials.
Required inputs and context discovery
Collect authoritative and copied protocol paths, generation pipeline, packet names, opcodes, field order/types, request/response direction, client/server versions, and no-touch generated paths.
Safety and risk level
Read-only. Never edit generated protocol copies directly, send live exploit packets, start servers, or mutate network state during the audit.
Workflow
- Identify source-of-truth and generated/copied protocol files. Completion criterion: every compared file is labeled source, generated, copy, or unknown.
- Normalize packet names, opcodes, direction, and fields into deterministic maps. Completion criterion: parsing ambiguity is reported rather than guessed.
- Compare presence, opcode, field names/order/types, and request/response pairing. Completion criterion: mismatches cite both client and server paths.
- Trace the generation or synchronization path for each mismatch. Completion criterion: the correct editable source is identified or BLOCKED.
- Propose source-first fixes and regression fixtures without mutating live services. Completion criterion: generated copies are never hand-edited.
Evidence and output contract
Produce lua-contract-audit.json with source/copy classification, missing packets, opcode mismatches, field mismatches, authority, generation path, limitations, and recommended source fixes.
Handoff contract
Record client/server paths, versions, source authority, mismatches, generated no-touch files, parsing limitations, and next source-first action.
What ships with it
2 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 79 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A fdbef8b1413b
lua-client-server-contract-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository hoatv2211/GameStudio-CodexKIT (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 770 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
deep-discovery
Use when the user asks for deep discovery, 100-question brainstorming, idea interrogation, architecture stress testing, strategy vetting, weakness finding, hole-poking, exhaustive exploration, planning or auditing Codex plugins or skills, or pre-commitment review of a design, plan, strategy, architecture, product…
prewalk
Use when the user wants a coding task executed with a strong planner model first and a faster/cheaper executor model after the first successful implementation edit.
codex-sdd:customize
Guide for injecting custom MCP tools, skills, and hook points into the OpenSpec workflow for team-specific processes.
codex-sdd:archive
Preserve change artifacts (proposal, design, tasks) into structured archive and update knowledge base. Final phase of OpenSpec workflow.
codex-sdd:plan
Create design.md with technical architecture and tasks.md with executable breakdown from an approved proposal. Second phase of OpenSpec workflow.
codex-sdd:propose
Generate structured proposal.md from user requirements, defining scope, constraints, and acceptance criteria. First phase of OpenSpec workflow.