mcp-server-for-ynab: Skill for Claude Code

.agents/skills/hardening-review/SKILL.md

hardening-review is a skill for Claude Code from hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab. It costs 25 tokens per session (498 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A review checklist for completed work in a Python repository. It checks the actual implementation, edge cases, tests, documentation claims, system boundaries, and generated files before signoff.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for reviewing another agent's changes, auditing a feature, preparing work for merging, and checking whether an implementation is genuinely complete.
Why use it?
It catches problems that a successful basic example may miss, including missing tests, overstated documentation, and logic in the wrong system layer.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents); mentions AGENTS.md.

This is hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on mcp-server-for-ynab itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything mcp-server-for-ynab configures →

Part of the mcp-server-for-ynab plugin — 12 skills, 2 MCP servers shipped together

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/master/.agents/skills/hardening-review/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install mcp-server-for-ynab, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 12 skills, 2 MCP servers.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for hardening-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for hardening-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab/hardening-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 25 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 498 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00025 $0.00498
Opus 5 $0.00013 $0.00249
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00100
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00050

Measured 11d ago against content hash b4c5a7cc9902, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

hardening-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 11d 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.

.agents/skills/hardening-review/SKILL.md · 58 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Hardening Review

Use this skill when reviewing a completed feature, workflow, or integration for quality and signoff readiness in this Python repository.

Use When

  • Reviewing another agent’s work
  • Preparing for merge
  • Auditing a feature or phase
  • Checking whether implementation is truly complete
  • Looking for edge cases and drift

Read First

  • AGENTS.md (if present)
  • README.md and pyproject.toml
  • Relevant architecture docs and tests under tests/
  • Contract or MCP tool schema docs, if present

Core Rules

  1. “Works on the happy path” is not enough.
  2. Docs honesty is part of completion.
  3. Missing or weak tests (pytest) are a real issue, not a footnote.
  4. Scope, auth, or boundary mistakes are high severity (wrong budget, leaked tokens in logs).
  5. Generated artifact drift (OpenAPI, schemas) matters when the repo uses codegen.
  6. Overclaiming implementation is a bug.
  7. Review should prioritize bugs, regressions, and risks before summaries.
  8. Run or verify pytest, ruff, mypy/pyright—whatever this repo’s CI uses—when judging signoff.

Workflow

  1. Identify the implemented scope.
  2. Check the actual code path, not just the claimed behavior.
  3. Review unhappy paths and partial-data behavior (API errors, empty lists, invalid ids).
  4. Check docs and contract alignment (README, tool descriptions, Pydantic models).
  5. Check tests for real proof, not only heavy mocking of the code under test.
  6. Report findings ordered by severity.
  7. State clearly whether the work is signoff-ready.

Common Failure Modes

  • unit tests exist but MCP tools or integrations are untested
  • docs still describe old or aspirational behavior
  • env vars or secrets handling is unclear or unsafe
  • generated artifacts drift from Pydantic/OpenAPI source
  • incomplete feature presented as complete
  • type hints lie about optional vs required fields

Completion Standard

The work has been checked for implementation reality, unhappy paths, docs honesty, contract alignment, and verification depth, and is clearly judged ready or not ready for signoff.

Read the full file on GitHub · 58 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 11d ago First seen · 58 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A b4c5a7cc9902

Subscribe to this mod's changes

hardening-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository hs737/mcp-server-for-ynab (1 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 498 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

impl-validator

Validate whether an implementation matches its stated goal. Use this skill when a skill or agent wants a second opinion on its own output, when the user says "check this implementation", "validate what you did", "is this correct?", "review the output", or "did you do this right?". Also spawned automatically as a…

Ar9av/obsidian-wiki · 105 tokens

semgrep-rule-variant-creator

Creates language variants of existing Semgrep rules. Use when porting a Semgrep rule to specified target languages. Takes an existing rule and target languages as input, produces independent rule+test directories for each language.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 50 tokens

invariant-first-testing

Write tests that describe system invariants, not specific bugs. Tests should read like design documentation, not a changelog of failures. Use when writing new tests, reviewing test suites, or refactoring reactive bug-fix tests into invariant-style tests.

Kevin-Liu-01/Agent-Machines · 54 tokens

refine

Compound quality pass over recently changed code. Orchestrates seven standalone skills in sequence: comment, lerp, style, fix-types, interface, test-invariants, exemplar-audit. Each pass is independently invokable. Use after any feature or refactor lands and before the final commit.

Kevin-Liu-01/Agent-Machines · 61 tokens

phoenix-review

Review completed work against the Intent Contract's acceptance criteria using objective evidence, not opinion — re-run every check, confirm no regressions, inspect the tamper-evident trace, and surface only real issues (bugs, unmet criteria, regressions). Use before shipping, after a feature is built, or when the user…

All-The-Vibes/ATV-Phoenix · 78 tokens

live-audit

Audit steam-games-mcp — build/test/lint gate, live MCP tool edge-case sweep (input validation, SteamID64/vanity/appid edge cases, key-gating), and source-level code review. Use when asked to test/audit the published or just-fixed steam-games-mcp package, hunt for bugs/edge cases, or repeat "the same kind of testing as…

Grinv/steam-games-mcp · 83 tokens