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 sbom-tool/gh-guard --skill hardening-detectiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sbom-tool/gh-guardWrote 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/sbom-tool/gh-guard/hardening-detection)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sbom-tool/gh-guard/hardening-detection"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sbom-tool/gh-guard/hardening-detection/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/sbom-tool/gh-guard/hardening-detection"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sbom-tool/gh-guard/hardening-detection.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 | $0.00027 | $0.00812 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00406 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00162 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00081 |
Grade A, and why
hardening-detection 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 10d 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Hardening Level Detection
Single source of truth for detecting a Rust project's current supply chain hardening level. Referenced by /audit, /harden, and the migration-guide skill.
Detection Algorithm
File Markers
| Marker | How to Detect |
|---|---|
| CI workflow | .github/workflows/ contains a YAML file with cargo test |
| Gate job | CI workflow has a job with if: always() + needs: pattern |
deny.toml |
Exists at project root |
| Dependency update tool | .github/dependabot.yml OR renovate.json / .github/renovate.json exists |
SECURITY.md |
Exists at root or .github/SECURITY.md |
| Publish workflow | .github/workflows/ contains a YAML triggered by tags: ["v*"] |
| Trusted Publishing | Publish workflow contains crates-io-auth-action |
| CodeQL workflow | .github/workflows/ contains a YAML with codeql-action |
| Scorecard workflow | .github/workflows/ contains a YAML with scorecard-action |
| Release script | scripts/release.sh or similar executable in scripts/ |
| SLSA provenance | Publish workflow contains slsa-github-generator |
| Fuzz workflow / OSS-Fuzz | .github/workflows/ contains a YAML with cargo-fuzz or cargo fuzz, OR project is listed in google/oss-fuzz (check via gh api repos/google/oss-fuzz/contents/projects/<name>) |
osv-scanner.toml |
Exists at project root |
Level Classification
Minimal — ALL of these present:
- CI workflow with
cargo test deny.tomlexists- Dependency update tool present:
.github/dependabot.ymlORrenovate.json/.github/renovate.json SECURITY.mdexists
Standard — ALL Minimal markers + ALL of these:
5. Publish workflow with crates-io-auth-action (Trusted Publishing)
6. CodeQL workflow present
7. Scorecard workflow present
8. Release script exists
Hardened — ALL Standard markers + ALL of these:
9. slsa-github-generator in publish workflow
10. Fuzz workflow present OR project listed in google/oss-fuzz
11. osv-scanner.toml exists
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 79 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 7e8248d70be0
hardening-detection is a skill published in the GitHub repository sbom-tool/gh-guard (15 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 812 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
apiiro-mcp-secure-prompt
Use the Apiiro MCP tool apiirosecureprompt when Apiiro MCP is configured in the client and the user wants security guidance added to a coding task before implementation. Trigger on secure-prompt via MCP, or when the user asks for security-aware prompt enhancement before coding (auth, new APIs, persistence, secrets…
implementing-github-advanced-security-for-code-scanning
Configure GitHub Advanced Security with CodeQL to perform automated static analysis and vulnerability detection across repositories at enterprise scale.
bob-egress
List, add, test, enable, disable, or remove Hacker Bob egress profiles from Codex.
detecting-typosquatting-packages
Flag misspelled, brandjacked, and typosquatted package names across npm, PyPI, and crates.io before installation using edit-distance, keyboard-proximity, and known-target corpus matching with typomania, OSSGadget, and pypi-scan.
security-expert
Expert-level application security, OWASP Top 10, penetration testing, and security best practices. Use when the user mentions OWASP, pentesting, appsec, vulnerability, encryption, or authentication, or when the task involves Security Principles, OWASP Top 10, Security Domains, or Broken Access Control.
codeinspectus-fix-one
Investigate and remediate exactly one user-selected CodeInspectus finding with evidence-gated reproduction, a separately approved minimal patch, focused regression testing, and an exact-prior-scan rescan. Use when a user asks an agent to examine, reproduce, fix, or verify one CodeInspectus finding without batching…