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 PlamenTSV/plamen --skill semantic-consistency-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PlamenTSV/plamenWrote 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/plamentsv/plamen/semantic-consistency-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/plamentsv/plamen/semantic-consistency-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/plamentsv/plamen/semantic-consistency-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/plamentsv/plamen/semantic-consistency-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/plamentsv/plamen/semantic-consistency-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 | $0.02576 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01288 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00515 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00258 |
Grade A, and why
semantic-consistency-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 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 — 189 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Niche Agent: Semantic Consistency Audit
Trigger:
HAS_MULTI_CONTRACTflag intemplate_recommendations.md(recon detects 2+ in-scope contracts/modules sharing parameters or formulas) Agent Type:general-purpose(standalone niche agent, NOT injected into another agent) Budget: 1 depth budget slot in Phase 4b iteration 1 Finding prefix:[SC-N]Added in: v1.1
When This Agent Spawns
Recon Agent 3 (Patterns + Surface + Templates) produces contract_inventory.md and constraint_variables.md.
If contract_inventory.md lists 2+ in-scope contracts/modules AND constraint_variables.md shows parameters or formulas appearing in multiple contracts (same variable name, same constant, or same formula pattern), recon sets HAS_MULTI_CONTRACT flag in the BINDING MANIFEST.
The orchestrator spawns this agent in Phase 4b iteration 1 alongside the 8 standard agents (counts as 1 budget slot).
Agent Prompt Template
Task(subagent_type="general-purpose", prompt="
You are the Semantic Consistency Agent. You audit cross-contract consistency of config variables, formulas, and magic numbers.
## Your Inputs
Read:
- {SCRATCHPAD}/constraint_variables.md (all constraint/config variables with setters)
- {SCRATCHPAD}/contract_inventory.md (all contracts/modules in scope)
- {SCRATCHPAD}/state_variables.md (all state variables)
- {SCRATCHPAD}/function_list.md (all functions)
- Source files in scope
## Processing Protocol (MANDATORY — applies to every CHECK below)
For each CHECK, execute three steps in order:
1. **ENUMERATE targets**: List every entity the CHECK applies to (functions, handlers, collections, call sites) as a numbered list before analysis begins.
2. **PROCESS exhaustively**: Analyze each numbered entity against the CHECK's criteria. Mark each "DONE" or "N/A (reason)" before moving to the next.
3. **COVERAGE GATE**: Count enumerated vs processed. If any entity lacks a marker, process it before proceeding to the next CHECK.
## Pre-Commit Dimension Enumeration (MANDATORY — fill BEFORE any finding)
**Per-sibling disposition rule**: When a finding holds for one contract in
a sibling set, force a per-sibling disposition row; do not self-refute
across siblings in one paragraph. A bug confirmed for one member of a
sibling set must be independently dispositioned for every other member,
because no narrative forces per-sibling disposition on its own. To
enforce this, every audit run begins with the four dimension tables
below. Fill them by reading recon artifacts
(`contract_inventory.md`, `function_summary.md`, `caller_map.md`,
`attack_surface.md`) — NOT from your own analysis.
```markdown
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 · 189 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 7715834d02a1
semantic-consistency-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository PlamenTSV/plamen (295 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 2,576 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.
prowler-tour
Keeps product-tour definitions aligned with the UI features they describe. Trigger: When modifying UI components that have associated tours, editing tour definition files, or renaming data-tour-id attributes.
evm-bytecode-analysis
Analyze supplied deployed EVM runtime bytecode with EVMole or guide a separate application in integrating a published EVMole Rust, Go, Python, or JavaScript binding. Use for unverified-contract inspection, ABI reconstruction from runtime code, selector discovery, storage-access analysis, EVM control-flow inspection…
talos-action-development
Develop, modify, review, and maintain standalone Talos actions in contracts/tasks/actions, including chain guardrails, contract bindings, transaction safety, schedules, action catalogues, and Talos documentation. Use when adding an action, changing an action’s behavior or parameters, updating a Talos schedule, or…
web3-poc-foundry
Complete Foundry PoC writing guide + all cheatcodes + DeFiHackLabs reproduction patterns. Use this when building a proof of concept exploit, setting up a fork test, using Foundry cheatcodes, or reproducing a known DeFi hack for learning.
web3-grep-arsenal
Master grep command arsenal for Web3 smart contract auditing. Use when starting a new protocol scan, before deep code review, or when hunting specific vulnerability classes.