GSD Pi is a command-line coding agent and project workflow system that plans, implements, verifies, and tracks software work through milestones, tasks, Git worktrees, and stored project notes. It is for developers who want structured, longer-running agent sessions using different model providers. The catalogue entries extend GSD Pi with skills and agents.
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 open-gsd/gsd-pi --skill security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/open-gsd/gsd-piWrote 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/open-gsd/gsd-pi/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/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/open-gsd/gsd-pi/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/security-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00086 | $0.01775 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00888 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00355 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00178 |
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 7d 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 — 182 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Invocation points:
- Any change touching authentication, authorization, session handling
- Any change touching user input → database, filesystem, or shell
- Any change exposing a new external surface (HTTP endpoint, webhook, IPC boundary)
- Secrets handling, environment variable changes, crypto code
- Pre-release audit of a feature or milestone
- Response to a suspected vulnerability
Do NOT use for:
- General code review (use
review) - Performance audits (use
code-optimizer)
<core_principle> CODE BEFORE CHECKLISTS. A threat model that doesn't read the code is theater. Find the actual input source, the actual validation (or absence), the actual sink. Cite file:line for every finding.
THREAT, NOT HYPOTHETICAL. "SQL injection is possible in theory" is useless. "If an attacker passes ' OR 1=1-- to getUser(name) at src/db/users.ts:42, the query becomes SELECT … WHERE name='' OR 1=1--', returning every row" is actionable.
READ-ONLY. Don't patch while reviewing — you conflate reviewer and author and lose the audit trail. Report, let the user act. </core_principle>
Step 1: Scope the review
Identify what to review:
- Recent diff (staged / branch / specific commit)
- A named subsystem (
src/auth/, the webhook handler, etc.) - A user-provided concern ("I'm worried about our JWT handling")
If the scope is vague, ask one round of clarifying questions (1–3 questions). Otherwise proceed.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 182 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 09402d25e1df
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository open-gsd/gsd-pi (1,218 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 1,775 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
gsd-graphify
Build, query, and inspect the project knowledge graph in .planning/graphs/.
gsd-import
Ingest external plans with conflict detection against project decisions before writing anything.
gsd-mempalace-capture
File a phase artifact into MemPalace; mirror decision facts into its temporal KG.
gsd-mempalace-recall
Recall decisions, patterns, and surprises from MemPalace before planning.
gsd-quick
Execute a quick task with GSD guarantees (atomic commits, state tracking) but skip optional agents.
gsd-surface
Toggle which skills are surfaced — apply a profile, list, or disable a cluster without reinstall.