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 KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude --skill dependency-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KhaledSaeed18/dotclaudeWrote 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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/dependency-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/dependency-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/dependency-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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/dependency-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/dependency-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 | $0.00076 | $0.00507 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00203 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
dependency-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.
What it actually says
Audit this project's dependencies for risk and staleness, then recommend a safe upgrade path. Detect the ecosystem before running anything.
Detect the ecosystem
Identify the package manager(s) from the manifests and lockfiles present, then use that ecosystem's native tooling. Common cases:
- JS/TS:
npm audit/pnpm audit/yarn npm audit;npm outdated. - Python:
pip list --outdated,pip-audit; Poetry/uv equivalents. - Rust:
cargo outdated,cargo audit. - Go:
go list -m -u all,govulncheck. - Java:
mvn versions:display-dependency-updates, OWASP dependency-check; Gradle equivalents. - Ruby:
bundle outdated,bundle-audit. - PHP:
composer outdated,composer audit.
If a tool isn't installed, say so and give the exact command to run rather than guessing results. Never invent advisory IDs or version numbers; quote them from real tool output.
Assess
- Vulnerabilities: list affected package, installed version, fixed version, severity, and advisory ID. Prioritise by severity and by whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable from this project.
- Outdated: separate patch/minor (low-risk) from major (potentially breaking).
- Breaking changes: for the upgrades you recommend, pull the relevant changelog / release notes / migration guide and summarise what would break.
Report
- Critical: security fixes to apply now, each with the upgrade command.
- Recommended: safe patch/minor bumps.
- Needs review: major upgrades, each with its breaking-change summary and a rough effort estimate.
- A suggested upgrade order that minimises churn and conflicts.
Keep findings factual and grounded in tool output; quote versions and advisory IDs exactly.
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 · 37 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A bbc208912fb4
dependency-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 507 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
analytics-strategy
Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement.…
content-strategy
Develop a content strategy covering editorial positioning, content pillars, formats, calendar, governance, and topical authority planning. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan a content program, define content pillars, build an editorial calendar, structure topic clusters, set up content governance, or align…
agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305
Für AGB Begriff Vorformuliert 305: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i
Für AGB Rechtswahl Schweizer Recht Rom I: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i.
haftungsdeckel-fuer-daten-und-modelldienste-pruefen
Bewertet Haftungshöchstbeträge bei Datenverlust, fehlerhaften Modellausgaben und Ausfällen digitaler Dienste anhand konkreter Schadensszenarien. Liefert eine Entscheidungsvorlage mit Risikobeträgen, Ausnahmen und Freigabebedarf.