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 Strategic-Automation/violin --skill api-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Strategic-Automation/violinWrote 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/strategic-automation/violin/api-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/strategic-automation/violin/api-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/strategic-automation/violin/api-testing/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/strategic-automation/violin/api-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/strategic-automation/violin/api-testing.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00393 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00157 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00079 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
api-testing 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 1mo 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
API Security Testing
On-demand skill for API protocol, inventory, schema, and machine-to-machine attack surfaces. It covers REST, GraphQL, SOAP, and WebSocket endpoints; load the targeted playbook rather than treating APIs as ordinary web routes. Model Context Protocol (MCP) surfaces route to llm-security.
When to Use
- OpenAPI/Swagger, GraphQL, SOAP, or WebSocket endpoints are discovered or in scope.
- The assessment needs endpoint inventory, version/legacy discovery, protocol-specific authorization checks, or schema-driven testing.
- Do not use this as a substitute for a dedicated root-cause playbook (for example IDOR, JWT, SSRF, or SQLi); route and load that playbook after API discovery identifies the class.
Playbook Routing
| Surface | Playbook |
|---|---|
| REST / SOAP / GraphQL / WebSocket API security | playbooks/api-security.md |
Common Pitfalls
- Inventory versions, undocumented endpoints, methods, schemas, and authentication contexts before fuzzing.
- Preserve full request/response pairs and protocol headers, including negotiated sessions.
- Keep rate, depth, batching, and streaming probes within the approved RoE.
Verification Checklist
- Engagement bootstrap and scope validation succeeded.
- The API surface inventory identifies protocol, version, authentication, and schema sources.
- The root-cause playbook was loaded for every confirmed vulnerability class.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 41 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 214c6c790b6c
api-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository Strategic-Automation/violin (154 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 393 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
performing-jwt-none-algorithm-attack
Execute and test the JWT none algorithm attack to bypass signature verification by manipulating the alg header field in JSON Web Tokens.
bypassing-authentication-with-forced-browsing
Discovering and accessing unprotected pages, APIs, and administrative interfaces by enumerating URLs and bypassing authentication controls during authorized security assessments.
kali-pentest-zh
A Chinese-language guide for carrying out authorized penetration tests with Kali Linux command-line tools through a local system, SSH, or Docker.
kali-pentest
Execute authorized penetration testing via Kali Linux CLI tools over SSH or Docker. Covers: information gathering, vulnerability analysis, sniffing & spoofing, web/API testing, exploitation, password attacks, wireless, cloud-native security, RFID/NFC, VoIP/ICS, reverse engineering, forensics, post-exploitation/C2, and…
api-security-testing
Security-test a REST, GraphQL, or gRPC API with Strix — autonomous agents that enumerate endpoints from an OpenAPI/GraphQL schema (or by crawling), then actually exploit the API-specific vulnerability classes in the OWASP API Security Top 10 (2023) — broken object-level authorization (BOLA/IDOR), broken object…
owasp-top-10-testing
Test an application against the OWASP Top 10 with Strix — autonomous AI agents that attempt real exploits for each category of the current OWASP Top 10:2025 (broken access control including SSRF, security misconfiguration, software supply chain failures, cryptographic failures, injection, insecure design…