Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to RudyCity/superagent. 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/RudyCity/superagent/main/.agents/skills/defense-in-depth-validation/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RudyCity/superagentWrote 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/rudycity/superagent/defense-in-depth-validation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rudycity/superagent/defense-in-depth-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rudycity/superagent/defense-in-depth-validation/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/rudycity/superagent/defense-in-depth-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rudycity/superagent/defense-in-depth-validation.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00875 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00438 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00175 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
Defense-in-Depth Validation 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 11d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to Defense-in-Depth Validation — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 131 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Defense-in-Depth Validation
Overview
When you fix a bug caused by invalid data, adding validation at one place feels sufficient. But that single check can be bypassed by different code paths, refactoring, or mocks.
Core principle: Validate at EVERY layer data passes through. Make the bug structurally impossible.
Why Multiple Layers
Single validation: "We fixed the bug" Multiple layers: "We made the bug impossible"
Different layers catch different cases:
- Entry validation catches most bugs
- Business logic catches edge cases
- Environment guards prevent context-specific dangers
- Debug logging helps when other layers fail
The Four Layers
Layer 1: Entry Point Validation
Purpose: Reject obviously invalid input at API boundary
function createProject(name: string, workingDirectory: string) {
if (!workingDirectory || workingDirectory.trim() === '') {
throw new Error('workingDirectory cannot be empty');
}
if (!existsSync(workingDirectory)) {
throw new Error(`workingDirectory does not exist: ${workingDirectory}`);
}
if (!statSync(workingDirectory).isDirectory()) {
throw new Error(`workingDirectory is not a directory: ${workingDirectory}`);
}
// ... proceed
}
Layer 2: Business Logic Validation
Purpose: Ensure data makes sense for this operation
function initializeWorkspace(projectDir: string, sessionId: string) {
if (!projectDir) {
throw new Error('projectDir required for workspace initialization');
}
// ... proceed
}
Layer 3: Environment Guards
Purpose: Prevent dangerous operations in specific contexts
async function gitInit(directory: string) {
// In tests, refuse git init outside temp directories
if (process.env.NODE_ENV === 'test') {
const normalized = normalize(resolve(directory));
const tmpDir = normalize(resolve(tmpdir()));
if (!normalized.startsWith(tmpDir)) {
throw new Error(
`Refusing git init outside temp dir during tests: ${directory}`
);
}
}
// ... proceed
}
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 131 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 26b67533bbd6
Defense-in-Depth Validation is a skill published in the GitHub repository RudyCity/superagent (21 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 875 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to Defense-in-Depth Validation, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.
langsmith-observability
LLM observability platform for tracing, evaluation, and monitoring. Use when debugging LLM applications, evaluating model outputs against datasets, monitoring production systems, or building systematic testing pipelines for AI applications.
experimental-code-coverage-local-debugger
Runs code coverage locally via Universal Test Runner (UTR) or helper scripts, mimicking LUCI trybots. Activate when CQ tryjobs fail or underreport coverage, to test local GN/recipe repairs before uploading, or to debug hermetic crashes.
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
cli-e2e
Write, modify, or debug Docker-based Composio CLI end-to-end tests under ts/e2e-tests/cli, including binary invocation, fixture isolation, output assertions, and package manifests. Use for CLI E2E test suites only; use cli-command for CLI source implementation.
work
Deliver one maintainer-approved EmDash issue, choosing the bug-fix path for a defect and the direct implementation path for an enhancement or task.