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 vigolium/piolium --skill sharp-edgesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vigolium/pioliumWrote 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/vigolium/piolium/sharp-edges)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vigolium/piolium/sharp-edges"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vigolium/piolium/sharp-edges/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/vigolium/piolium/sharp-edges"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vigolium/piolium/sharp-edges.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 | $0.00074 | $0.02515 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.01006 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00503 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00251 |
Grade A, and why
sharp-edges 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to sharp-edges — 11 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 293 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Sharp Edges Analysis
Evaluates whether APIs, configurations, and interfaces are resistant to developer misuse. Identifies designs where the "easy path" leads to insecurity.
When to Use
- Reviewing API or library design decisions
- Auditing configuration schemas for dangerous options
- Evaluating cryptographic API ergonomics
- Assessing authentication/authorization interfaces
- Reviewing any code that exposes security-relevant choices to developers
When NOT to Use
- Implementation bugs (use standard code review)
- Business logic flaws (use domain-specific analysis)
- Performance optimization (different concern)
Core Principle
The pit of success: Secure usage should be the path of least resistance. If developers must understand cryptography, read documentation carefully, or remember special rules to avoid vulnerabilities, the API has failed.
Rationalizations to Reject
| Rationalization | Why It's Wrong | Required Action |
|---|---|---|
| "It's documented" | Developers don't read docs under deadline pressure | Make the secure choice the default or only option |
| "Advanced users need flexibility" | Flexibility creates footguns; most "advanced" usage is copy-paste | Provide safe high-level APIs; hide primitives |
| "It's the developer's responsibility" | Blame-shifting; you designed the footgun | Remove the footgun or make it impossible to misuse |
| "Nobody would actually do that" | Developers do everything imaginable under pressure | Assume maximum developer confusion |
| "It's just a configuration option" | Config is code; wrong configs ship to production | Validate configs; reject dangerous combinations |
| "We need backwards compatibility" | Insecure defaults can't be grandfather-claused | Deprecate loudly; force migration |
Sharp Edge Categories
1. Algorithm/Mode Selection Footguns
APIs that let developers choose algorithms invite choosing wrong ones.
The JWT Pattern (canonical example):
- Header specifies algorithm: attacker can set
"alg": "none"to bypass signatures - Algorithm confusion: RSA public key used as HMAC secret when switching RS256→HS256
- Root cause: Letting untrusted input control security-critical decisions
What ships with it
16 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.
- references/auth-patterns.md 6.8 KB
- references/case-studies.md 8.0 KB
- references/config-patterns.md 9.5 KB
- references/crypto-apis.md 5.2 KB
- references/lang-c.md 5.5 KB
- references/lang-csharp.md 7.2 KB
- references/lang-go.md 6.5 KB
- references/lang-java.md 6.7 KB
- references/lang-javascript.md 6.8 KB
- references/lang-kotlin.md 6.6 KB
- references/lang-php.md 6.0 KB
- references/lang-python.md 6.5 KB
- references/lang-ruby.md 6.1 KB
- references/lang-rust.md 6.4 KB
- references/lang-swift.md 6.1 KB
- references/language-specific.md 13 KB
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 · 293 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 38e1aca2a418
sharp-edges is a skill published in the GitHub repository vigolium/piolium (141 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 2,515 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to sharp-edges, differing in 11 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…
next-cache-components-optimizer
Optimize the meaningful UI available immediately from a Next.js route on an initial load (hard navigation) or named client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route and entry point at a time; the shipped test then guards…