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 leifericf/agentic-sdk --skill audit-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/leifericf/agentic-sdkWrote 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/leifericf/agentic-sdk/audit-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/leifericf/agentic-sdk/audit-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/leifericf/agentic-sdk/audit-code/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/leifericf/agentic-sdk/audit-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/leifericf/agentic-sdk/audit-code.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 | $0.00016 | $0.00857 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00343 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00171 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
audit-code 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
audit-code
Role: the audit loop. Reviews and fixes existing code at any scope, running review rounds until a round finds nothing new, then offers the stack to land.
Prerequisites
~/.agentic-sdk/<project>/project.edn exists with :lanes, :dimensions-active,
and :spine. At least one module has landed; there is code to audit.
Procedure
The per-round procedure is run-review-round; this skill is the loop
around it. The topology and conflict rules are in
skills/shared/references/worktree-model.md.
- Initialize. Start the audit change as the next commit on the
current tip, never on the main bookmark:
jj new, thenjj describe -m "Refactor: Audit <scope>". Hold the scope (a module, a list of modules, or a theme) in context; the rest of the run cites it. A long audit may keep a minimal, gitignored resume checkpoint under~/.agentic-sdk/<project>/runs/<slug>/recording what is done (rounds completed, findings still open); never committed, never the hand-off medium. - Shard the scope by module ownership: one shard is one module directory plus its tests. For a theme scope, grep the theme to a file list first, then group by module. Dispatch gather-module-context once per shard and reuse the briefs across all dimensions in the round.
- Rounds while findings warrant. Dispatch review-round-runner with the audit change id, the shards, and the round number. It runs run-review-round: fans out the active check-* dimensions over each shard, runs the spine triage task to dedupe and order findings, dispatches editor waves by level via apply-findings, and re-verifies. It returns one summary line; its escalations and out-of-scope items ride back in that line and you hold them. A full audit is not bound by the per-phase two-round cap implement-change uses: finding everything is the point. Keep going while a round still surfaces high- or medium-severity findings. A round that finds only low-severity or style findings is the last one: record those and stop rather than spend another full round. Cap the loop at a round budget stated up front (default four) to bound cost; say so if hit. Resume after a crash per the worktree-model resume law.
- Report. The audit change is already a linear stack on the tip;
nothing to restack. Report from context: the rounds table (the
one-line summaries), what was fixed by level, the escalations the
rounds returned, and the merged changelog set (the editors'
CHANGELOG:lines from each round summary). Offer the stack to land; advancing main is the maintainer's call, never autonomous.
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 · 75 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 74a585ead3ef
audit-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository leifericf/agentic-sdk (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 857 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
synergy-tracker
Manage cross-project synergy tracking between sibling projects. Use when the user wants to log a shared pattern, a divergence, an extraction candidate, or something a sibling project has that this one doesn't. Also use when the user wants to promote synergy entries to Basic Memory (workflow 5). NOT for upstream…
upstream-tracker
Manage upstream issue tracking for this project. Use when the user wants to log a bug or friction point in a vendor package or npm dependency, review open upstream items, resolve a tracked issue, run a trend review, generate the upstream observations section of a sprint retrospective, promote upstream observations to…
backlog-groomer
Manage the beads backlog for this project. Use when the user wants to review or triage open issues, reprioritize the backlog, identify obsolete issues to close, investigate a topic to inform future work, create new issues from research findings, or enrich an existing issue with external context. Trigger phrases…
retrospective
Run a sprint retrospective for this project. Use when the user says 'retrospective', 'retro', 'close out the sprint', 'what went well', 'generate retro', or wants to generate a RETRO-NN.md file. Reads UPSTREAM-.md files, recent git history, and conversation context to pre-populate the retrospective. Do NOT use for…
swarm-wave
Orchestrate multi-agent development sprints with wave-based parallelism. Use when the user wants to plan a swarm sprint, partition work into file-disjoint waves, map file contention across open issues, run a post-wave quality gate with review agents, manage agent backpressure, run a parallel research wave, or…
harden-memories
Audit the bd remember store and recommend which entries to prune, so each one earns its per-session bd prime injection cost. Read-only: it proposes a triage table plus the exact bd forget / migration commands; you run them. Use when bd remember entries have accumulated, feel stale, redundant, or conflicting, or when…