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 imisic/claude-marketplace --skill sanitize-publicgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/imisic/claude-marketplaceWrote 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/imisic/claude-marketplace/sanitize-public)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/sanitize-public"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/sanitize-public/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/imisic/claude-marketplace/sanitize-public"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/sanitize-public.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 | $0.00150 | $0.02681 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00075 | $0.01340 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00536 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00268 |
Grade A, and why
sanitize-public 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 7d 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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
sanitize-public
The gate between a private working environment and anything other people can see. Most setups carry some private infrastructure worth keeping private (a LAN host, machine names, encrypted secrets, work that cannot be named publicly). Most of what gets authored is clean, but the cost of one leak crossing into a marketplace others clone onto their own machines is high and irreversible. This skill makes the check mechanical and repeatable instead of a thing you have to remember.
Why this exists (the marketplace fact that raises the stakes)
When someone installs a Claude Code plugin, the plugin directory is copied onto their machine, and relative-path plugins clone the whole marketplace repo. Whatever sits in that repo ships. The same is true of a downloadable content bundle (a tar.gz someone fetches) and any public repo. There is no "delete it later" once it is on other people's disks and in git history. So the scan runs on the artifact that will actually ship, not the source tree it came from.
When this fires (and when it does not)
Fires on:
- Building or updating a plugin marketplace repo, or adding a plugin to one
- Packaging a downloadable bundle or exporting content for publish
- Pushing a new public repo or gist, or sharing a skill/command with someone
- Explicit ask: "is this safe to publish," "scan before shipping," "make sure nothing private leaks," "check this bundle"
Does not fire on:
- Work that stays inside a private surface (private repos, local-only files, a private Claude config repo). Those are allowed to contain private data; that is the point of them.
- Routine editing that is not about to be published. Do not nag mid-draft.
If the destination is ambiguous, ask one question: "is this going somewhere the public can reach?" If yes, gate it.
Rebuild, do not redact (the rule that actually prevents leaks)
Never copy a private file into a public artifact and then remove the private parts. Redaction can only remove what you thought to look for, so it fails on the thing you did not think of, every time. The scanner is a backstop for when this rule is broken, not a substitute for it. A scanner finding means the process already failed.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 7d ago Changed · +39 lines 61a1cd31277c
- 11d ago First seen · 129 lines · 150 tokens per session scan A 1c7cad809749
sanitize-public is a skill published in the GitHub repository imisic/claude-marketplace (2 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 150 tokens to every session and 2,681 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
agentic-review
Deep multi-agent code review for local changes. Inspired by AmpCode's agentic review. Use when you want comprehensive analysis of staged changes, unstaged changes, specific commits, or branch differences. Spawns parallel specialized agents (security, performance, patterns, architecture) and synthesizes actionable…
qa
Full QA on all session changes using Codex as a second pair of eyes. Use when user says "QA", "full QA", "QA my changes", "QA all your changes", or "use codex to review". Runs git diff, sends changes to Codex for thorough review, and synthesizes findings.
review-responder
Use when receiving feedback on code you implemented, responding to reviewer comments, deciding which review suggestions to implement, or pushing back on incorrect review feedback.
pr-sweep
Use when you want to sweep all open pull requests across all repos, triage their status, run code reviews on unreviewed PRs, merge what's ready, fix quick blockers, and produce a full status report. Trigger when the user says "check my PRs", "close out open PRs", "what's the status of my PRs", "sweep my PRs", "PR…
rubber-ducky
Use when you've planned a non-trivial change and are about to implement it, finished a complex or multi-file piece of work, just wrote tests, or are stuck on repeated failures — and any time the user says "rubber duck this", "rubber ducky", "get a second opinion", "sanity-check my plan", "poke holes in this", "what am…
open-pr
Use when wrapping up a development task and getting a PR ready — runs local tests, creates a PR (if one doesn't exist) with a structured description template, conducts a code review via the review skill, and checks CI status with quick fixes. Trigger when the user says they're done with a feature, want to open a PR…