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 Tariux/AI-Skills-Not-Awesome --skill auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Tariux/AI-Skills-Not-AwesomeWrote 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/tariux/ai-skills-not-awesome/audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tariux/ai-skills-not-awesome/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tariux/ai-skills-not-awesome/audit/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/tariux/ai-skills-not-awesome/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tariux/ai-skills-not-awesome/audit.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00512 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00256 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00102 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
Package Audit 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 12d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 40 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A de78cab0fd28
Package Audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository Tariux/AI-Skills-Not-Awesome (45 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 512 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
skill-performance-monitor
Use when monitor and analyze skill effectiveness in real-time. Track usage, success rates, response quality, and user satisfaction for continuous optimization. Use when monitoring and analyze skill effectiveness in real-time. track usage, success.
create-supervisor
Create, update, list, and safely maintain evidence-bounded graduate-advisor Skills from comments, meeting notes, chat logs, documents, and user corrections. Use when the user asks to create or evolve a supervisor/advisor Skill, distill a mentor's working style, run /create-supervisor, /update-supervisor…
architecture-reviewer
Reviews application architecture for scalability, coupling, separation-of-concerns, and maintainability issues. Use for system-level review, not individual file/function-level code review.
code-reviewer
Reviews source code for bugs, readability, maintainability, performance, and best-practice violations. Use for general-purpose code review of a diff, file, or function, not tied to a specific language concern.
dependency-auditor
Reviews package dependencies for unnecessary packages, outdated or risky patterns, duplication, and licensing/maintenance risk. Use when a dependency manifest has grown unchecked or before adding a new dependency.
pr-reviewer
Performs a pull-request-style review across an entire diff, organizing findings by severity and considering scope/intent, not just line-level code quality. Use when reviewing a full PR rather than a single function.