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 Ovid/paad --skill agentic-owaspgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Ovid/paadWrote 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/ovid/paad/agentic-owasp)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ovid/paad/agentic-owasp"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ovid/paad/agentic-owasp.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 | $0.00084 | $0.00151 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.00076 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00030 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00015 |
Grade A, and why
agentic-owasp 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.
What it actually says
OWASP Top 10:2025 Code Review (Antigravity Wrapper)
This is a project-specific skill. The detailed checklist and procedures are in:
.kiro/skills/agentic-owasp/SKILL.md
Please refer to that file for the full criteria.
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 · 12 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A 323b0d2b9090
agentic-owasp is a skill published in the GitHub repository Ovid/paad (110 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 151 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-delta
Review only changes since last commit using impact analysis. Token-efficient delta review with automatic blast-radius detection.
pre-landing-review
Pre-landing PR review. Analyzes diff against the base branch for SQL safety, LLM trust boundary violations, conditional side effects, and other structural issues. Use when explicitly asked for the specialized pre-landing workflow. Product /review requests are handled by OpenBitFun's unified Review mechanism instead.…
pr-review-canvas
Create a OpenBitFun Canvas for reviewing a pull request, branch diff, or change set with Cursor-style diff cards, review maps, risk callouts, and focused reviewer flow. Use when the user asks for a PR review canvas, diff walkthrough, change-set overview, or visual review summary.
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
cross-model-review
A second-opinion code review that asks a different AI model to independently inspect a change, then compares both reviews. It focuses on logic, security, consistency, and omissions.