Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to prolific-oss/cli. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/prolific-oss/cli/main/.claude/skills/audit-command/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/prolific-oss/cliWrote 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/prolific-oss/cli/audit-command)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/prolific-oss/cli/audit-command"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/prolific-oss/cli/audit-command.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 | $0.00014 | $0.01825 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00912 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00365 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00183 |
Grade A, and why
audit-command 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 2d 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 — 250 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CLI Command Audit Skill
When to Use This Skill
Invoke this skill when the user:
- Asks to "review a command", "check a command", or "audit a command"
- Wants to verify a command conforms to project conventions
- Uses the slash command /review-command
Arguments
Arguments may be provided via $ARGUMENTS or gathered interactively.
Expected arguments:
resource- Resource name (e.g., collection, study, workspace)command- Command name (e.g., list, get, create, update). Omit to review all commands under the resource.
If arguments are missing, use the ask_user tool to gather them.
Review Checklist
Work through each section below. For each item, check the relevant source files in
cmd/{resource}/ and ui/{resource}/. Report findings at the end grouped by severity:
- 🔴 Must fix — non-conformant, will cause inconsistent UX or compile errors
- 🟡 Should fix — diverges from convention, not blocking
- 🟢 OK — conforms to the pattern
1. Output Flag (list commands only)
What to check: Every list command must register the output flags via shared.AddOutputFlags.
Expected pattern in cmd/{resource}/list.go (or equivalent list file):
// Options struct must embed OutputOptions
type ListOptions struct {
Output shared.OutputOptions
// ... other fields
}
// At the bottom of the constructor, after all other flags:
shared.AddOutputFlags(cmd, &opts.Output)
How to verify:
- Read the command file
- Confirm
shared.OutputOptionsis present in the options struct - Confirm
shared.AddOutputFlags(cmd, &opts.Output)is called in the constructor - Confirm
shared.ResolveFormat(opts.Output)drives the rendering switch (see §3)
Why it matters: Without this, users cannot use --json, --csv, --table, or -n flags,
which breaks scripting and pipeline use cases.
2. Dependency Injection
What to check: Command constructors must use dependency injection — never construct a real client or writer internally.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 250 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 0f19e58f0da9
audit-command is a skill published in the GitHub repository prolific-oss/cli (13 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,825 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.