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 agentmods add skills/robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions/secure-code-reviewnpx skills add Robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions --skill secure-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Robotti-io/copilot-security-instructionsWrote 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/robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions/secure-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions/secure-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions/secure-code-review.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00506 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00253 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
secure-code-review 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 4d 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Secure Code Review
When to use
Use this skill when asked to review code for security, produce findings, or prepare guidance for remediation.
Inputs to collect (if available)
- What component(s) are in scope (API, UI, worker, infra scripts)
- Data sensitivity (PII, auth/session, payments)
- Deployment assumptions (internet-facing, internal, multi-tenant)
- Any known incidents, CVEs, or audit requirements
Step-by-step process
- Map entry points & trust boundaries
- Enumerate request handlers, background consumers, file parsers, template renderers, and admin endpoints.
- Identify where untrusted input crosses into privileged actions or sensitive sinks.
- Scan for high-risk classes
- Injection: SQL/NoSQL/LDAP/OS/template
- Authn/authz: missing checks, insecure defaults, confused deputy
- Deserialization & file handling: unsafe loads, path traversal, upload
- Crypto: homegrown crypto, weak randomness, token validation mistakes
- Logging: secrets/PII exposure, overly verbose errors
- SSRF: URL fetchers, webhook validation gaps
- Deep-dive the highest impact areas
- Trace data flow from input → validation → authorization → sink.
- Look for missing allow-lists, type confusion, and implicit conversions.
- Write findings in a consistent format
- Title, severity, confidence
- Where (file/function)
- Risk + prerequisites
- Repro steps
- Recommendation + verification steps
- Close with a remediation plan
- Quick wins (hours), medium fixes (days), structural guardrails (weeks).
Output template
Summary
- Scope reviewed:
- Top issues:
- Overall risk: Low / Medium / High / Critical
Findings (repeat)
- Title
- Severity / Confidence
- Where
- Risk
- Repro
- Recommendation
- Verification
Repo integration (optional)
If this repo includes prompt files under /prompts, the following are commonly relevant:
secure-code-review.prompt.mdscan-for-insecure-apis.prompt.mdvalidate-input-handling.prompt.mdreview-auth-flows.prompt.md
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 69 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A d25935894805
secure-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Robotti-io/copilot-security-instructions (42 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 506 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
cli-logging-ux
Use this skill when editing or creating CLI output, logging, warnings, error messages, progress indicators, or diagnostic summaries in the APM codebase. Activate whenever code touches console helpers (richsuccess, richwarning, richerror, richinfo, richecho), DiagnosticCollector, STATUSSYMBOLS, CommandLogger, or any…
cut-release
Use this skill to cut an APM release from the current worktree: assess whether the cycle since the last tag warrants a patch or minor bump (semver discipline against the merged-since-last-tag diff), sanitize the [Unreleased] CHANGELOG block into a dated version block with one concise "so what" entry per merged PR…
docs-sync
Use this skill whenever a pull request is opened, reopened, or synchronized in microsoft/apm to assess whether and how the documentation corpus must change to stay truthful with the proposed code change. Activate even when the PR title or body says nothing about docs -- the skill must run on every PR to detect silent…
docs-impact-architect
Use this skill when the docs-impact-classifier returns a structural verdict, signalling that the documentation TOC must change to accommodate the PR. Proposes TOC deltas (new pages, moves, merges) and emits new-page outline stubs that the doc-sync panel later fleshes out. Holds the 3-promise narrative (consume /…
distributed-mesh
How to coordinate with squads on different machines using git as transport.
external-comms
PAO workflow for scanning, drafting, and presenting community responses with human review gate.