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 me2resh/apexyard --skill security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/me2resh/apexyardWrote 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/me2resh/apexyard/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/me2resh/apexyard/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/me2resh/apexyard/security-review/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/me2resh/apexyard/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/me2resh/apexyard/security-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 69 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
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 | $0.00023 | $0.02088 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.01044 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00418 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
security-review 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 6d 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 — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/security-review — Security Review
Review a pull request specifically for security vulnerabilities and best practices.
LSP-aware (optional, recommended)
This skill performs semantic code navigation — finding definitions, walking references, tracing handlers across modules. With LSP enabled (ENABLE_LSP_TOOL=1 + per-language plugin per docs/getting-started.md), queries are ~3-15× cheaper in token cost than grep + Read. Without LSP, the skill falls back to grep + Read transparently — no new failure mode, just optional speed.
Per-language LSP plugins live in Claude Code's marketplace. Install once; the skill detects the active language and dispatches automatically.
Activated agent + role
When /security-review runs:
- Primary reviewer: the Security Reviewer agent (Hakim) at
.claude/agents/security-reviewer.md— runs the automated security checklist. - Human approval gate: the Security Auditor role — activates on any PR that touches auth / crypto / secrets / user data / PII, or when
/security-reviewis explicitly invoked. - Escalation for strategic calls: the Head of Security — threat modelling, compliance decisions, or novel attack surfaces.
- For active testing: the Penetration Tester — exploit discovery, API security review, pre-release security sign-off.
See .claude/rules/role-triggers.md for the full activation protocol.
Usage
/security-review 42
/security-review 42 your-org/your-repo
When to Use
Invoke for PRs that touch:
- Authentication / authorisation
- User input handling
- API endpoints
- Data storage
- Third-party integrations
- Cryptography or secrets
Process
0. Write the active-reviewer marker (REQUIRED — me2resh/apexyard#843)
Before spawning the Security Reviewer agent, write the active-reviewer session marker. It records that this review pass is the sanctioned one and suppresses warn-review-marker-write.sh's advisory warning on the *-security.approved write (same convention as /code-review's rex marker; that hook warns and never blocks since #1026 — AgDR-0111). At skill entry:
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 232 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 32ee514613d6
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository me2resh/apexyard (498 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 2,088 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.