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 kiruxich/legitAgent --skill checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kiruxich/legitAgentWrote 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/kiruxich/legitagent/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kiruxich/legitagent/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kiruxich/legitagent/check/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/kiruxich/legitagent/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kiruxich/legitagent/check.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 | $0.00063 | $0.00407 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00163 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00081 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
check 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
Check
- Вызови MCP-инструмент
scanсервера legitagent.- Всегда передай абсолютный
root— корень открытого workspace. БезrootUser MCP сканирует домашний каталог. - Если пользователь указал путь после
/check, используй его. enили--lang en→lang: "en".
- Всегда передай абсолютный
- Затем вызови MCP
reviewс тем жеrootиlang. - Review работает
offlineпо умолчанию и не вызывает внешнюю LLM. OpenRouter или локальная модель используются только если пользователь настроил env режима. - Покажи
confirm,ask_humanиnot_reviewedвместе сkind,confidenceиevidence.rejectне показывай как нарушение — это отклонённое срабатывание эвристики. - Не передавай
write: trueвautofixавтоматически: этот флаг применяет все safe-рецепты свежего scan, а не только LLM-confirm. Покажи safe/manual recipes; изменяй код только после подтверждения соответствующей находки человеком и с достаточным confidence.ask_humanиnot_reviewedпокажи человеку для решения. - После исправлений пересканируй (
scan+review), пока highconfirmне исчезнут или пользователь явно не примет риск. - Напомни: это эвристика, не юридическое заключение. Не выдумывай находки.
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 Changed · +1 lines b886fac260c8
- 1mo ago First seen · 20 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 8fa879edc342
check is a skill published in the GitHub repository kiruxich/legitAgent (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 407 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
compliance
Use when scoping which regulatory frameworks bind a business — SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS, EU AI Act, DORA, NIS2 — building a control register with owners and evidence, or standing up the cadence that keeps it audit-ready. NOT drafting privacy-policy/ROPA/DPA or ToS text (that is gdpr-privacy, terms-conditions)…
app-store-preflight-compliance
Pre-submission compliance scanner workflow for Apple App Store apps. Use when reviewing iOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, or visionOS projects (Swift, Objective-C, React Native, Expo) for App Store rejection risks, submission readiness, privacy compliance, or guideline violations.
performing-soc2-type2-audit-preparation
Automates SOC 2 Type II audit preparation including gap assessment against AICPA Trust Services Criteria (CC1-CC9), evidence collection from cloud providers and identity systems, control testing validation, remediation tracking, and continuous compliance monitoring. Covers all five TSC categories (Security…
pipefy-toolkit-setup
Guide a first-time user through Pipefy AI toolkit setup (Cursor Marketplace plugin, hosted MCP, local install.sh, or Claude Code plugin). Use when the user asks to install Pipefy MCP, connect Claude/Cursor to Pipefy, run /pipefy:install, or set up mcp.pipefy.com. Do not use for day-to-day Pipefy workflows after MCP is…
eu-ai-act
Reference knowledge on the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689): risk tiers, obligations, compliance deadlines including the 2026 AI Omnibus changes, penalties, and scope. Activate when the user asks about the EU AI Act, AI regulation in Europe, high-risk AI compliance, AI transparency or watermarking obligations…
complyedge-eu-ai-act-runtime-deny
Runtime deny for EU AI Act Article 5 and Article 50 on this prompt or output via ComplyEdge TrustLint MCP. Use when the user wants agent I/O compliance enforcement, not system classification, FRIA forms, or C2PA watermarking.