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 hugocarreira/agentrc --skill security-best-practicesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hugocarreira/agentrcWrote 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/hugocarreira/agentrc/security-best-practices)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hugocarreira/agentrc/security-best-practices"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hugocarreira/agentrc/security-best-practices/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/hugocarreira/agentrc/security-best-practices"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hugocarreira/agentrc/security-best-practices.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 | $0.00073 | $0.01681 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00840 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00336 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00168 |
Grade A, and why
security-best-practices 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 9d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
What ships with it
12 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.
- agents/openai.yaml 237 B
- LICENSE.txt 11 KB
- references/golang-general-backend-security.md 38 KB
- references/javascript-express-web-server-security.md 48 KB
- references/javascript-general-web-frontend-security.md 38 KB
- references/javascript-jquery-web-frontend-security.md 33 KB
- references/javascript-typescript-nextjs-web-server-security.md 42 KB
- references/javascript-typescript-react-web-frontend-security.md 41 KB
- references/javascript-typescript-vue-web-frontend-security.md 31 KB
- references/python-django-web-server-security.md 38 KB
- references/python-fastapi-web-server-security.md 44 KB
- references/python-flask-web-server-security.md 31 KB
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 89 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 10103a23a418
security-best-practices is a skill published in the GitHub repository hugocarreira/agentrc (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,681 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., .tsx, .ts, .js). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
review
Use when the user wants code assessed rather than changed — "review PR 88", "is this branch ready to merge?", "look over my changes", "any problems with this diff?", "give me a code review", "what do you think of this PR?", "sanity-check this branch", "ship it?". Applies to a pull request or the current branch when…
fix
PRFlow's code-review reception skill (formerly receiving-code-review), used by the review-and-fix loop and available directly. Use when addressing review feedback already posted on a pull request — verifying findings before applying them — as distinct from /prflow:review-and-fix, which runs the review itself and then…
review-and-fix
Use when the user wants problems in a pull request or the current branch both found AND corrected — "review my changes and fix what's wrong", "clean up whatever the review turns up", "address the review feedback on this branch", "tidy this PR up before merge", "find and fix the issues here". Requires explicit fix…