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/prodsec-skills --skill secdevai-fixgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RedHatProductSecurity/prodsec-skillsWrote 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/prodsec-skills/secdevai-fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/redhatproductsecurity/prodsec-skills/secdevai-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redhatproductsecurity/prodsec-skills/secdevai-fix.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00701 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
secdevai-fix 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Fix Application
Applies security fixes identified by a prior code review. Always shows a diff preview and requires explicit user approval before modifying any file.
When to Use This Skill
- Applying fixes for findings from a prior
secdevai-reviewor equivalent security review - Applying a filtered subset of fixes (e.g., only critical severity findings)
- Previewing proposed code changes before deciding whether to apply them
Workflow
Step 1: Verify Prerequisites
Confirm that a prior security review has been run and findings are available. If no prior review exists, inform the user and suggest running a security review first.
Step 2: Apply Severity Filter (optional)
If the user specifies a severity level (critical, high, medium, low), limit fixes to findings at that level or above. If no filter is specified, present all available fixes.
Step 3: Present Fixes
For each fix, show:
- Finding: Description and location (file and line number)
- Severity: The severity of the finding being fixed
- OWASP / CWE reference: Category and ID
- Before: The vulnerable code
- After: The fixed code
- Security impact: What the fix prevents
Example:
## Fix #1 (Critical)
**Finding**: SQL Injection in `app.py:42`
**OWASP Category**: [A03: Injection](https://owasp.org/Top10/A03_2021-Injection/) ([CWE-89](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/89.html))
**Before**:
query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}"
**After**:
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = %s", (user_id,))
**Security impact**: Eliminates SQL injection by using a parameterized query.
The database driver handles escaping, preventing attacker-controlled input from
modifying query structure.
Step 4: Require Explicit Approval
Before applying any changes:
- Show all proposed diffs
- Ask the user to confirm which fixes to apply
- Never modify code without explicit approval
- Never apply fixes in bulk without showing each change first
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 · 95 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A d742601ca114
secdevai-fix is a skill published in the GitHub repository RedHatProductSecurity/prodsec-skills (52 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 701 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 2026-08-30.
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.