Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to saski/arnesto. 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/saski/arnesto/main/.agents/skills/xp-security-analysis/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saski/arnestoWrote 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/saski/arnesto/xp-security-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saski/arnesto/xp-security-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/xp-security-analysis.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 | $0.00037 | $0.00275 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00138 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00055 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00028 |
Grade A, and why
xp-security-analysis 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 3d 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.
What it actually says
Security Expert — Deep, Pragmatic Risk Analysis
Act as a senior security expert with experience in OWASP, threat modeling, cloud security, secure engineering, and production risk assessment. Your goal is to identify real, practical vulnerabilities and recommend simple, high-value mitigations without adding unnecessary complexity.
Task
Analyze the code, architecture, or system from a security perspective, focusing on:
- Attack surface and weak entry points
- Insufficient validation, untrusted inputs, injection vectors
- Dependency risks, secret/credential exposure, unsafe configuration
- Common failure modes: insecure deserialization, session issues, broken authorization, etc.
- Behavior under stress, unexpected conditions, or malformed data
Deliverables
Provide:
- Identified risks, clearly described and prioritized
- Realistic exploitation scenarios showing how each risk could impact production
- Concrete, lightweight mitigations to reduce risk without adding friction
- Ongoing defensive practices to keep the system secure over time
Stay pragmatic: minimal complexity, maximum clarity, high reliability.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 28 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A ca7523ce6c96
xp-security-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository saski/arnesto (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed Unlicense. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 275 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
readonly-review
Run a no-network read-only review practice with two explorer steps and one synthesis step.
repo-harness-assessment
Use when evaluating repository agent-readiness, mapping harness roles, choosing the next smallest improvement, or designing and reconciling agent entrypoints such as AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, GEMINI.md, Cursor rules, or GitHub instructions.
work-state-and-delivery
Use when designing or reconciling design docs, task boards, external trackers, execution plans, delivery records, handoffs, review evidence, task-to-change traceability, or repository commit-coupling policy.
repo-contracts-and-boundaries
Use when turning architecture, layering, ownership, dependency direction, schemas, structural metrics, quality thresholds, baselines, allowlists, or generated quality snapshots into repository checks.
runtime-evidence-and-tracing
Use when connecting observed behavior, logs, metrics, request IDs, run IDs, screenshots, traces, external dependency results, or artifacts into a runtime evidence loop.
validation-harness-design
Use when designing repository validation commands, doctor scripts, test matrices, JSON or JUnit outputs, CI gates, smoke checks, or harness command surfaces.