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 summarybotng/summarybot-ng --skill security-visual-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/summarybotng/summarybot-ngWrote 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/summarybotng/summarybot-ng/security-visual-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/summarybotng/summarybot-ng/security-visual-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/summarybotng/summarybot-ng/security-visual-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/summarybotng/summarybot-ng/security-visual-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/summarybotng/summarybot-ng/security-visual-testing.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 | $0.00047 | $0.01706 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00853 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00341 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00171 |
Grade A, and why
security-visual-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 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 — 224 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Security Visual Testing
<default_to_action> When performing security-aware visual testing:
- VALIDATE URLs before navigation (check for malicious patterns)
- SCAN for PII before saving screenshots (mask sensitive data)
- CAPTURE parallel viewports (mobile, tablet, desktop)
- COMPARE against baselines (detect visual regressions)
- AUDIT accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA compliance)
Quick Security-Visual Checklist:
- URL validation (no javascript:, data:, file: schemes)
- PII detection (emails, phones, SSN, credit cards, API keys)
- Visual regression (diff threshold < 0.1%)
- Viewport coverage (320px, 768px, 1024px, 1440px)
- Accessibility score (> 90% axe-core pass rate)
Critical Success Factors:
- Always mask PII before storing screenshots
- Test across all target viewports in parallel
- Store baselines in version control
- Run accessibility audits on every visual change </default_to_action>
Quick Reference Card
When to Use
| Scenario | Use This Skill? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Testing login pages | Yes | Contains PII (passwords, emails) |
| Visual regression suite | Yes | Parallel viewport + baseline comparison |
| Payment forms | Yes | Credit card data needs masking |
| Public marketing pages | Maybe | Only if sensitive data possible |
| API-only testing | No | Use security-testing skill instead |
Key Capabilities
| Capability | Description | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| URL Validation | Block malicious URLs before navigation | <5ms |
| PII Detection | Find 6+ types of sensitive data | <100ms |
| Parallel Viewports | Test 4 viewports simultaneously | 4x faster |
| Visual Regression | Pixel-diff with configurable threshold | <500ms |
| Accessibility Audit | WCAG 2.1 A/AA/AAA compliance | <2s |
Workflows
1. Security Visual Audit (Full Pipeline)
# Run complete security + visual audit
aqe test visual-audit --url https://example.com --security --accessibility
Steps:
- Validate URL security (block malicious schemes)
- Scan page for security issues (XSS, injection patterns)
- Capture screenshots across 4 viewports in parallel
- Compare against stored baselines
- Run accessibility audit (axe-core)
- Generate consolidated report
What ships with it
3 files 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.
- 5d ago First seen · 224 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A c0725cbc2627
security-visual-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository summarybotng/summarybot-ng (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,706 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
Accessibility Auditor
Comprehensive WCAG 2.1 AA compliance testing combining automated axe-core scans with manual keyboard navigation, screen reader compatibility, and focus management verification.
Axe-core Accessibility Testing
Accessibility testing skill using axe-core and Playwright for automated WCAG 2.1 compliance auditing, custom rules, and accessibility reporting.
a11y-test
Use when you need to run real accessibility tests — Playwright keyboard interactions, axe-core scanning, visual regression, and WCAG 2.2 compliance checks. The measurement layer that feeds evidence into a11y-critic reviews.
testing-e2e
End-to-end testing patterns with Playwright — page objects, AI agent testing, visual regression, accessibility testing with axe-core, and CI integration. Use when writing E2E tests, setting up Playwright, implementing visual regression, or testing accessibility.
Accessibility A11y Enhanced
Comprehensive WCAG compliance and accessibility testing covering ARIA, keyboard navigation, screen readers, color contrast, and automated a11y validation.
BrowserStack Cloud Testing
Cloud-based cross-browser and cross-device testing with BrowserStack including Automate, App Automate, Percy visual testing, Observability, and integration with Playwright, Selenium, and CI/CD pipelines.