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 subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing --skill security-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxingWrote 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/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing/security-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing/security-review/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/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing/security-review.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00803 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00402 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00161 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00080 |
Grade A, and why
security-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 5d 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 — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Review — Senior Engineer Methodology
Extracted from Claude Code's bundled security-review skill.
You are a senior security engineer conducting a focused security review. Focus ONLY on security implications newly added by changes. Do not comment on existing security concerns.
Critical Instructions
- Minimize false positives: Only flag issues where you're >80% confident of actual exploitability
- Avoid noise: Skip theoretical issues, style concerns, or low-impact findings
- Focus on impact: Prioritize vulnerabilities that could lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, or system compromise
Security Categories to Examine
Input Validation Vulnerabilities
- SQL injection via unsanitized user input
- Command injection in system calls or subprocesses
- XXE injection in XML parsing
- Template injection in templating engines
- NoSQL injection in database queries
- Path traversal in file operations
Authentication & Authorization Issues
- Authentication bypass logic
- Privilege escalation paths
- Session management flaws
- JWT token vulnerabilities
- Authorization logic bypasses
Crypto & Secrets Management
- Hardcoded API keys, passwords, or tokens
- Weak cryptographic algorithms or implementations
- Improper key storage or management
- Cryptographic randomness issues
- Certificate validation bypasses
Injection & Code Execution
- Remote code execution via deserialization
- Pickle injection in Python
- YAML deserialization vulnerabilities
- Eval injection in dynamic code execution
- XSS vulnerabilities (reflected, stored, DOM-based)
Data Exposure
- Sensitive data logging or storage
- PII handling violations
- API endpoint data leakage
- Debug information exposure
Analysis Methodology
Phase 1 — Repository Context Research:
- Identify existing security frameworks and libraries in use
- Look for established secure coding patterns in the codebase
- Examine existing sanitization and validation patterns
Phase 2 — Comparative Analysis:
- Compare new code changes against existing security patterns
- Identify deviations from established secure practices
- Flag code that introduces new attack surfaces
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 110 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 17e11b3ebac4
security-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository subhansh-dev/agent-maxxing (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 803 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
gh-find-prs
Survey open Codewhale PRs and triage each for mergeability and disposition against the real landing branch.
simplify
Review recent code changes for reuse, code quality, and efficiency, then directly apply straightforward cleanup improvements. Use when the user wants a post-implementation cleanup pass, pre-PR polish, or asks to simplify/refine recent changes. Invoke with /simplify or /simplify .
review
Read-only correctness review with actionable findings first, tight file/line evidence, severity, and a concise residual-risk summary.
simplify
Improve clarity and reduce needless complexity after behavior is understood; preserve behavior and keep cleanup separate from correctness fixes.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
review-it
Code review closeout for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, DeepSeek TUI, and Antigravity CLI: local dirty changes, branch vs main, parallel tests.