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 Liberty91LTD/cti-skills --skill hash-investigationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Liberty91LTD/cti-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/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/hash-investigation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/hash-investigation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/hash-investigation/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/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/hash-investigation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/hash-investigation.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 | $0.00087 | $0.01884 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00754 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00377 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00188 |
Grade A, and why
hash-investigation 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 2mo 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 — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
hash-investigation
Investigate a file hash end-to-end. Chain lookups, surface malware family attribution, prioritize infrastructure pivots, and decide whether deeper malware analysis is warranted.
This skill invokes: /lookup-liberty91 (first-party — run first), /lookup-virustotal, /lookup-otx, optionally /lookup-reversinglabs (vendor-authoritative classification + MITRE ATT&CK + sandbox), optionally /lookup-crowdstrike (Falcon Intel verdict + actor/malware attribution), optionally /lookup-misp and/or /lookup-opencti (internal correlation), optionally /lookup-sentinel (exposure check in your own telemetry), optionally /malware-analysis, then /source-assessment, /tlp-guide, /confidence-levels.
When to invoke
- User asks to check a hash, identify malware, or enrich a sample
- Another skill surfaces a hash during investigation (e.g.,
/ip-investigationfound communicating files) - User asks "what is this malware" with a hash as input
Inputs
indicator: <MD5 | SHA-1 | SHA-256 hash>
context: <optional — where did this hash come from?>
tlp_ceiling: <optional, default AMBER>
request_malware_analysis: <optional bool — trigger /malware-analysis after lookup>
Procedure
1. Validate
- Confirm the hash is a valid length (MD5=32, SHA-1=40, SHA-256=64 hex chars)
- Reject if not; route to correct skill if it looks like a different indicator type
2. Parallel lookups
Always run (free / commonly available):
/lookup-virustotal hash <value> # detection stats, family, behavior tags
/lookup-otx hash <value> # community pulses, campaign attribution
Add to the same parallel batch if credentials are configured — don't demote these to "later, maybe":
/lookup-reversinglabs hash <value> --av-scanners --ticloud # if $REVERSINGLABS_USER is set. Vendor-authoritative verdict + threat name + AV detection ratio. RL is the strongest single-source verdict on a hash; run it whenever available, not just when VT signal is thin.
/lookup-crowdstrike indicator <value> # if $CROWDSTRIKE_CLIENT_ID is set. Falcon Intel verdict — malicious confidence + the threat actors and malware families CrowdStrike links to this hash + report refs. One API call.
/lookup-liberty91 ioc-lookup <value> # if $LIBERTY91_API_KEY is set. First-party — run first: does your own platform already hold this hash, with what verdict, confidence and TLP?
/lookup-misp search-attributes --value <value> # if $MISP_URL + $MISP_KEY are set. Internal correlation against your own catalogued events.
/lookup-opencti lookup <value> # if $OPENCTI_URL + $OPENCTI_TOKEN are set. Internal correlation against your OpenCTI knowledge base (observables + indicators in one call).
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 165 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A e06090d82678
hash-investigation is a skill published in the GitHub repository Liberty91LTD/cti-skills (36 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 1,884 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
analyzing-campaign-attribution-evidence
Systematically evaluate cyber-campaign evidence to attribute an operation to a threat actor, using the Diamond Model and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to weigh infrastructure overlaps, TTP consistency, malware code similarity, and timing/language artifacts into confidence-weighted attribution assessments. Use…
analyzing-threat-actor-ttps-with-mitre-attack
MITRE ATT&CK is a globally-accessible knowledge base of adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) based on real-world observations. This skill covers systematically mapping threat actor beh.
analyzing-threat-landscape-with-misp
Analyze the threat landscape using MISP (Malware Information Sharing Platform) by querying event statistics, attribute distributions, threat actor galaxy clusters, and tag trends over time. Uses PyMISP to pull event data, compute IOC type breakdowns, identify top threat actors and malware families, and generate threat…
analyzing-campaign-attribution-evidence
Use when campaign attribution analysis involves systematically evaluating evidence to determine which threat actor or group is responsible for a cyber operation. This skill covers collecting and weighting attr.
prompt-injection-auditor
Security audit of LLM system prompts, agent instruction files (SKILL.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md), and agent configurations against prompt injection attacks. Use when the user wants to (1) audit or harden a system prompt or agent instructions against prompt injection, (2) review an agent skill or system prompt for…
analyzing-campaign-attribution-evidence
Campaign attribution analysis involves systematically evaluating evidence to determine which threat actor or group is responsible for a cyber operation. This skill covers collecting and weighting attr.