Omnigent is an open-source orchestration layer for running and coordinating different AI coding agents through one system. It is for developers who want to combine agents, apply policies and sandboxing, and continue sessions across devices. The catalogue add-ons extend its agent workflows.
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/omnigent-ai/omnigent/security-auditnpx skills add omnigent-ai/omnigent --skill security-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/omnigent-ai/omnigentWrote 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/omnigent-ai/omnigent/security-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/omnigent-ai/omnigent/security-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/omnigent-ai/omnigent/security-audit.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 | $0.00064 | $0.00321 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00161 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00064 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00032 |
Grade A, and why
security-audit 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 5d 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
security-audit — review code for security issues, report only
1. Collect scope
Identify what to audit (a directory, a diff, a module). Gather it yourself with sys_os_* / git — this is plumbing, not investigation.
2. Dispatch the scanner (purpose: explore / search)
Hand the scanner the scope; it reads source, manifests, history and returns per-finding evidence. Do NOT sprawl across the repo yourself.
3. Synthesize the draft — FINDINGS TEMPLATE (must match orchestrator prompt)
For each finding:
### <Severity>: <short title>
- **Severity**: Critical | High | Medium | Low | Info
- **Location**: file:line
- **Recommendation**: <fix guidance — describe it, never apply it>
- **Confidence**: high | medium | low
4. Cross-vendor review (purpose: review)
Route the draft through the reviewer (codex, different vendor) to confirm true positives and drop false positives. Fold in its verdicts.
5. Deliver
Present the final report. You REPORT; you never edit, patch, or fix code.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 36 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A a5404bb1f9b2
security-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository omnigent-ai/omnigent (9,658 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 321 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
ml-plan
Use when the user wants an implementation plan, architecture design, or multi-step ML pipeline — "build X", "implement X", "design X", "set up X".
ml-debug
Use when something is failing in ML/AI work — OOM, NaN, divergence, crashes, bad throughput, wrong outputs, dependency conflicts.
ml-research
Use when the user wants to understand an ML/AI topic, compare approaches, or survey framework capabilities — "how does X work?", "compare X vs Y".
ml-iterate
Use when the user is stuck, needs ranked next steps, or wants alternatives after initial experiments — "I tried X and got Y, what next?".
using-superml
Use when starting any conversation involving ML/AI — establishes how to use Leeroopedia KB tools and workflow skills.
ml-verify
Use when the user wants to verify code, config, or math before running — or proactively before any expensive training job or deployment.