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 justnau1020/claude-os --skill auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/justnau1020/claude-osWrote 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/justnau1020/claude-os/audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/justnau1020/claude-os/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/justnau1020/claude-os/audit/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/justnau1020/claude-os/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/justnau1020/claude-os/audit.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 | $0.00046 | $0.04013 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01605 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00803 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00401 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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 — 432 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Full-Project Consistency Audit
Orchestrate a comprehensive project audit by spawning a team of parallel research agents, deduplicating their findings, and producing a scored audit report.
Argument Parsing
Parse $ARGUMENTS for these flags:
--lanes <comma-separated>: Which audit lanes to run. Valid values:infra,frontend,plugins,arch,tests,deps,security. Default: all lanes.--previous <path>: Path to a previous audit report. When provided, the writer agent adds Fixed Since Last Audit, New Findings, and Regressions sections.--include-stash: When present, also spawn the git-stash-auditor agent.--drop-stashes: Used with--include-stashduring the fix phase. Tells the ops-cleanup agent togit stash dropall stashes instead of just cataloging them.--fix: After the audit completes, automatically run the planning + fix pipeline (Phase 2.5 through Phase 6).--fix-only: Skip audit recon entirely. Read the existingdocs/AUDIT_FINDINGS.mdand go straight to the planning + fix pipeline. Requires a prior audit report to exist.--deep: Enhanced audit using installed CLI tools. The default audit uses grep/glob (fast).--deepadds tool-assisted scanning per lane.
Severity Scoring Rubric
All research agents MUST use this rubric when categorizing findings:
- Critical = breaks at runtime OR creates legal liability
- Major = silent failure OR affects >1 subsystem
- Minor = cosmetic, tech debt, no user impact
Output Format for All Research Agents
Each research agent produces a markdown table (max 50 lines) with these columns:
| Finding | Severity | Location | Expected | Actual |
|---|
Rules for all research agents:
- Read selectively -- grep/glob first, then read only relevant lines
- Never read entire files at once
- Keep context lean
- Update your task to completed when done
Team Architecture
Create a team called project-audit. The main agent (team lead) stays lean -- it only spawns agents, routes messages, and summarizes. It never reads files or does research itself.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 432 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 70ac3b3aece2
audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository justnau1020/claude-os (3 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 4,013 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
audit
Project health audit and health check — architecture, performance, tests, dependencies, code quality. Use when assessing overall project health, before releases, or after refactors.
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
polish-code
Stage, format, lint, test, review, smoke test, and re-run itself until stable. Use when the user asks to "polish code", "refine code", "iterate on code quality", "review loop", "clean up, test, and review loop", or "run the polish loop".
simplify-code
Run a multi-agent review of changed files for scope, reuse, quality, efficiency, clarity, and altitude issues followed by fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify code", "review changed code", "check for code reuse", "review code quality", "review efficiency", "simplify changes", "clean up code", "refactor changes"…
java-code-review
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
ontoly-software-graph
Use Ontoly's deterministic Software Graph and MCP capabilities for architecture review, request tracing, dependency analysis, configuration lookup, and impact analysis before falling back to source-file search.