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 RedHatProductSecurity/agentic-threat-modeling --skill threat-model-analyzegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RedHatProductSecurity/agentic-threat-modelingWrote 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/redhatproductsecurity/agentic-threat-modeling/threat-model-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/redhatproductsecurity/agentic-threat-modeling/threat-model-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redhatproductsecurity/agentic-threat-modeling/threat-model-analyze/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/redhatproductsecurity/agentic-threat-modeling/threat-model-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redhatproductsecurity/agentic-threat-modeling/threat-model-analyze.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00052 | $0.03473 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.01736 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00695 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00347 |
Grade A, and why
threat-model-analyze 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 9d 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 — 256 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Threat Analysis Engine
You are performing the analysis phase of threat modeling. You receive a system context (from the discover phase) and apply the specified framework(s) to identify threats, assess risk, and map to threat actors.
Inputs
- System context — the structured profile from the discover phase (components, data flows, trust boundaries, assets, entry points)
- Framework(s) — which framework(s) to apply (default: STRIDE)
- Actor personas — specific actors to focus on, or "auto" for automatic selection (default: auto)
- Depth — quick (surface-level), standard (thorough), or deep (exhaustive with attack trees for top threats)
Analysis Workflow
Step 1: Load Framework Reference
Read the appropriate framework reference file(s) from ./reference/:
./reference/stride.mdfor STRIDE./reference/pasta.mdfor PASTA./reference/linddun.mdfor LINDDUN./reference/vast.mdfor VAST./reference/attack-trees.mdfor Attack Trees./reference/octave.mdfor OCTAVE
Always also load ./reference/threat-actors.md for actor profiling.
Step 2: Select Threat Actors
If actors are set to "auto", analyze the system context to suggest relevant actors:
- Examine data stored: Map data types to actor profiles using the heuristics in threat-actors.md
- Examine system exposure: Internet-facing vs. internal, user base, industry
- Examine technology stack: Dependency footprint, cloud vs. on-prem, legacy vs. modern
- Examine compliance context: Regulatory requirements signal which actors are relevant
Select the 2-4 most relevant actors and document why each was selected. Be specific — "organized crime is relevant because this system stores 2M customer payment card details" not just "organized crime could target this system."
If specific actors were requested, use those but still explain why they're relevant (or note if they seem unlikely for this system).
Step 3: Apply the Framework
Follow the methodology defined in the framework reference file. Use the data classification table from the discovery phase to calibrate threat severity — a SQL injection against a Restricted-classified data store (credentials, encryption keys) is Critical impact, while the same vulnerability against a Public-classified store (marketing content) is Low impact. Reference the data classification in threat narratives to justify impact ratings.
What ships with it
7 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 256 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 7a0a677e489b
threat-model-analyze is a skill published in the GitHub repository RedHatProductSecurity/agentic-threat-modeling (4 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 3,473 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…
next-cache-components-optimizer
Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…
next-partial-prefetching-adoption
Turn on Partial Prefetching in a Next.js app and work through the insights it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable or adopt Partial Prefetching, flip the partialPrefetching flag, opt routes in with export const prefetch = 'partial', audit Link prefetch={true} behavior, preserve existing prefetched UI with…