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 agentmods add skills/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/ln-22-codebase-auditornpx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-22-codebase-auditorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skillsWrote 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/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/ln-22-codebase-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/ln-22-codebase-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/ln-22-codebase-auditor.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00038 | $0.02655 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.01327 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00531 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00265 |
Grade A, and why
ln-22-codebase-auditor 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 today.
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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codebase Auditor
Goal: Perform a broad, read-only production-code health audit. Find concrete cross-cutting failure, security, delivery, and maintenance risks without turning detector matches or personal style preferences into findings. Do not substitute for documentation trust, test-portfolio, whole-architecture, or persistence-specific review.
Execution contract: The ordered checkboxes are the Definition of Done. Track every item internally as PENDING, PROVEN with concrete evidence, CLEARED with evidence that its condition is absent, or UNPROVEN with a gap; reading, delegation, or tool failure is not proof. Reconcile items after each section. Before returning, resolve all PENDING and count only PROVEN and CLEARED; apply the skill's verdict and approval rules to every gap.
Preserve user intent, scope, and existing authorization. Continue authorized work; ask only for consequential unresolved choices or required external approval. Scale depth to material risk without silently skipping checks. Preserve dependency and safety ordering; otherwise choose the verification method appropriate to each obligation.
Tool Routing
| Need | Preferred tool | Use it when | Fallback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Repository map and stack detection | Native file listing, manifests, build files, and repository instructions | Establishing scope, generated areas, entrypoints, supported runtimes, and commands | Targeted tree inspection and known entrypoints |
| Symbols, callers, ownership, and data flow | Language server or host-native code intelligence | A finding depends on symbol identity, references, overrides, route wiring, or cross-file behavior | Narrow text search plus direct inspection of every relevant match |
| Current changes and historical context | Git status, diff, log, and blame | Separating current work, regressions, intentional constraints, and dead compatibility paths | Current implementation and explicit decision records |
| Delivery health | Repository-defined build, lint, type, test, and smoke commands | Establishing whether the project can ship in its documented environment | Inspect CI and scripts; mark execution unavailable |
| Dependency and security state | Native package-manager audit, manifests, lockfiles, and official advisories | Checking known vulnerabilities, unsupported versions, and dependency health | Official registry and vendor sources; never guess severity |
| Runtime evidence | Existing logs, metrics, traces, profiles, and diagnostics | Static analysis cannot establish frequency, reachability, or operational impact | Call-path analysis with an explicit static-only limitation |
| Current external behavior | Official specifications, vendor documentation, and release notes | A finding depends on current API, runtime, or standard behavior | Primary-source web research; otherwise mark UNVERIFIED |
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.
- today Changed · -18 lines · -5 tokens per session cb0e95212285
- 7d ago First seen · 131 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 89af89b6f097
ln-22-codebase-auditor is a skill published in the GitHub repository levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills (557 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 2,655 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
semgrep-rule-creator
Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections.
variant-analysis
Find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across codebases using pattern-based analysis. Use when hunting bug variants, building CodeQL/Semgrep queries, analyzing security vulnerabilities, or performing systematic code audits after finding an initial issue.
vuln-report
Turn one confirmed security finding into a disclosure-ready GitHub advisory with root cause, proof of concept, impact, and source evidence. Use for reporting an established vulnerability, not discovering or validating one.
fp-check
Systematically verifies suspected security bugs to eliminate false positives. Produces TRUE POSITIVE or FALSE POSITIVE verdicts with documented evidence for each bug.
huggingface-spaces
Build, deploy, debug, or maintain a Hugging Face Space using Gradio, Docker, or Static SDKs. Use for general Space hosting and configuration; use huggingface-zerogpu for ZeroGPU runtime constraints and lora-space-builder for LoRA demos.