Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/paceaitian/paceflownpx agentmods add skills/paceaitian/paceflow/auditWrote 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/paceaitian/paceflow/audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/paceaitian/paceflow/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paceaitian/paceflow/audit/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/paceaitian/paceflow/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paceaitian/paceflow/audit.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 | $0.00044 | $0.02512 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01005 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00502 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00251 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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 — 164 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PACEflow 全面审查
内部资料：该流程只用于 PaceFlow 仓库自身审计，不随 marketplace 插件发布，也不是用户项目工作流 skill。
触发场景
- 用户说"完整分析"、"全面审查"、"全面检查"
- 用户调用
/audit - 版本发布前的质量门控
审查原则
本 skill 的核心价值是独立发现问题，不是照 guidebook/action-plan/README 打勾。
方法论内核见可发布通用版
review-methodology.md（独立发现 / 证据优先级 / 报告全部再验证 / 三件武器 / 严重度纪律 / 误报防御七条 / 记录基线）。本内部 skill 不重复方法论本体，只在其上叠加 PaceFlow 专用靶子——下面的证据优先级具体路径、审查范围 Glob、五维度并行划分、v7 审计基线。两处共用同一套方法论，避免漂移。
证据优先级：
- 当前代码与配置：
plugin/hooks/**、plugin/agents/**、plugin/agent-references/**、plugin/skills/**、plugin/.claude-plugin/**、.claude-plugin/** - 当前测试与 fixture：
tests/**、tests/agent-tests/** - 真实运行证据：
plugin/hooks/pace-hooks.log、Claude Code session JSONL、production smoke 产物 - 用户面/内部文档：
README.md、REFERENCE.md、CLAUDE.md、docs/**
文档只能用于发现候选矛盾或设计意图，不能单独作为 bug 证据。任何 C/H 级问题都必须从代码路径、配置注册、测试缺口或真实日志中独立证明。
输出范围：
- Phase 1 报告所有可疑发现，不按“看起来低优先级”提前丢弃；严重度只做标注。
- Phase 2 再做证据验证、去重、降级和误报剔除。
- 最终报告必须包含：确认发现、部分正确/有意设计、误报分析、验证矩阵、证据来源、剩余风险。
- 每个发现都写清：文件:行号、触发路径或证据、影响、建议修复；没有代码/测试/日志证据时写成候选或文档问题。
长 diff / stall 防御：
- 大文件或大区间审计时，先用
git log --stat <range> -- <file>定位相关 commit，再用git show <sha> -- <file>逐个查看。 - 不要一次性对
pace-utils.js、pre-tool-use.js、长文档或整个大区间跑无界git diff。 - 长文件读取优先用
rg定位函数/标题，再sed -n读取小范围。
当前 v7 审计基线：
- marketplace
source指向./plugin；发布面是 4 个用户 skill +artifact-writeragent + hooks/agent-references/migrate；internal/skills/audit/、docs、tests、tickets 不随 marketplace 发布 - v7
changes/**详情模型；v5 活跃流程只允许迁移/桥接，不继续兼容 - artifact root 可为 local/vault/custom，真实 git worktree 沿用宿主项目
.pace/artifact-root artifact-writer是唯一 artifact 写入者；主 session 不得直写 C/V/R 标记（含<!-- REVIEWED -->与 frontmatterreviewed-date）- 项目级
artifact-writer.lock串行化 shared artifact 写入；Bash 不得修改该锁 approve-and-start与close-chg是主路径合并操作；验证证据由主 session 运行并读取- review gate 与 V 阶段同构：R 阶段标志
<!-- REVIEWED -->/reviewed-date与 VERIFIED /verified-date平行（action=review↔action=verify），close-chg折叠 VERIFIED 时同样折叠 REVIEWED；agent-lifecycle-guard.js对close-chg与action=review强制review-confirmed/review-source/review-findings（缺则 hard-deny），stop.js对“已 verified 但未 reviewed”给软门提醒；review gate 只记录审计步骤发生+记录，不裁决质量 SubagentStop报告标题问题是观察/恢复提示，不是 artifact 功能阻断
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 164 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 5eb7a3e48ae2
audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository paceaitian/paceflow (38 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 2,512 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
concord-relay
Keep this Grok session reachable by other Concord agents while idle.
architecture-review
Method for assessing a codebase's structure — duplication, single-responsibility violations, layering problems, and coupling — and recommending minimal, incremental improvements. Use when asked to review architecture, assess structure or technical debt, evaluate module boundaries, or plan a refactor. Reviews the…
code-quality-review
Checklist and method for reviewing code quality — readability, maintainability, SOLID, DRY, performance, and backward compatibility. Use when asked to review code, a diff, a branch, or a merge request for quality, or before finalizing significant changes. For GitHub PR review use the built-in /review; for…
security-audit
Security review and hardening workflow — root-cause analysis of vulnerabilities, authentication and authorization checks, least privilege, input handling, secret hygiene, and security regression tests. Use when reviewing code for security, fixing a vulnerability, hardening a feature, or handling auth, permissions…
orchestrate
Coordinate an active Hardproof run across discovery, design, planning, implementation, review, verification, delivery, and learning.
review
Challenge a Hardproof implementation during REVIEW against its approved contract, code quality, tests, and risk boundaries.