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/huzaifa525/claude-code-optimizer/security-scannpx skills add huzaifa525/claude-code-optimizer --skill security-scangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/huzaifa525/claude-code-optimizerWhat 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 | $0.00023 | $0.01165 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00583 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00233 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
security-scan 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 3d 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Run a comprehensive security scan on the codebase.
Iron Law
No "probably safe." Verify or flag. If you cannot confirm a pattern is secure, flag it. False positives are cheap. Missed vulnerabilities are not.
Scan Checklist
1. Hardcoded Secrets (CRITICAL)
grep -rn "password\s*=\|api_key\s*=\|secret\s*=\|token\s*=" src/
grep -rn "BEGIN.*PRIVATE KEY" .
grep -rn "sk-\|pk_\|ghp_\|gho_\|AKIA" src/
Also check for:
- Base64-encoded secrets (long random strings in config)
- Secrets in comments ("// old password was...")
- Secrets in test fixtures that match production patterns
2. SQL Injection
- String concatenation in SQL queries (
"SELECT * FROM " + table) - Raw queries without parameterization
- ORM bypass with raw SQL
- Dynamic table/column names from user input
3. XSS (Cross-Site Scripting)
dangerouslySetInnerHTML,innerHTML,document.write- Template rendering with unescaped user input (
{!! !!},| safe,<%- %>) - URL parameters reflected in page without encoding
- SVG/image uploads that could contain scripts
4. Command Injection
exec(),spawn(),system()with user-controlled input- Template strings in shell commands
- Unsanitized filenames in file operations
5. Authentication & Authorization
- Routes/endpoints missing auth middleware
- Role checks that can be bypassed (client-side only)
- Password hashing (must be bcrypt/argon2/scrypt — NOT md5/sha1/sha256)
- JWT: check expiry validation, algorithm confusion, secret strength
- Session fixation or missing session regeneration on login
6. Input Validation
- API endpoints accepting unvalidated input
- Missing type checks, length limits, format validation
- File upload: missing type restrictions, size limits, path traversal
- Regex DoS (ReDoS) — catastrophic backtracking patterns
7. Sensitive Data Exposure
- Sensitive data in logs (passwords, tokens, PII)
- Stack traces or internal paths in error responses
.envfiles not in.gitignore- Sensitive data in URL query parameters (logged by proxies)
- Missing HTTPS enforcement
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 133 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 5c94f16c93f8
security-scan is a skill published in the GitHub repository huzaifa525/claude-code-optimizer (9 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,165 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
throughline
Use when the user asks to use Throughline from Codex, continue or restore Throughline memory, export read-only handoff context for a local launcher, prepare a new Codex thread handoff, summarize a captured Codex session, or check whether the Throughline Codex Stop hook captured the current session. Hide long…
critical-review
Use when you want structured feedback on a plan or document before implementation.
save
Save all session progress to status tracking files. Use when you want to checkpoint work mid-session or before ending.
code-review
Use when you want a thorough code review of files, changes, or the entire project before shipping.
implement-batch
Use when you want to implement the next batch of a plan. Handles module implementation, testing, and validation.
audit-orchestrator
Universal Pre-Scan → Analysis → Optimization → Report orchestrator for ANY project type — web apps (Astro/SvelteKit/Next), infrastructure/homelab repos, CLI tools, libraries, backend services, monorepos, data/ML projects, docs. Self-detects project type and runs the matching analysis track. Session state lives in…