sharp-edges

sharp-edges is a skill for Claude Code from waybarrios/opencode-power-pack. It costs 47 tokens per session (2,470 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review method for finding APIs, settings, and interfaces that are easy to misuse in ways that create security problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to assess library APIs, configuration options, cryptographic interfaces, and authentication or authorization designs for safer defaults.
Why use it?
It reveals designs where the convenient choice is unsafe or developers must remember hidden rules to avoid mistakes.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the opencode-power-pack plugin — 55 skills shipped together

Good fit Use it to assess library APIs, configuration options, cryptographic interfaces, and authentication or authorization designs for safer defaults.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add waybarrios/opencode-power-pack --skill sharp-edges
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install opencode-power-pack, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 55 skills.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for sharp-edges

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for sharp-edges

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waybarrios/opencode-power-pack/sharp-edges.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 47 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,470 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 8 findings, up to high

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • high YARA Match · line 65
    YARA rule matched a hack tool or exploit indicator (offensive tools, reconnaissance, privilege escalation, or exploit frameworks).
    Fix: Remove offensive tool references and exploit code. Legitimate agent skills should not contain penetration testing tools, exploit frameworks, or reconnaissance utilities.
  • high Rogue Agent · line 80
    Skill modifies its own code, configuration, or behavior at runtime. Self-modification enables an agent to escalate privileges, disable safety constraints, or install persistent backdoors.
    Fix: Prevent the skill from modifying its own code, SKILL.md, or configuration files. Treat skill files as read-only at runtime.
  • high Anti-Refusal · line 119
    Skill instructs the agent to omit warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Stripping safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.
    Fix: Remove instructions that suppress warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Let the agent surface safety-relevant caveats to the user.
  • high Prompt Injection · line 125
    This pattern attempts to override system instructions or ignore safety constraints. Without LLM analysis, manual review is recommended.
    Fix: Remove or rewrite any text that instructs the agent to ignore prompts, override safety rules, or trust unverified content. Ensure skill content cannot be injected to alter agent behavior.
  • high Prompt Injection · line 287
    This pattern attempts to override system instructions or ignore safety constraints. Without LLM analysis, manual review is recommended.
    Fix: Remove or rewrite any text that instructs the agent to ignore prompts, override safety rules, or trust unverified content. Ensure skill content cannot be injected to alter agent behavior.
  • medium Excessive Agency · line 84
    Skill allows unbounded resource consumption (API calls, storage, compute). Without rate limits or quotas, a compromised or misbehaving agent can cause denial-of-service or cost overruns.
    Fix: Set explicit rate limits, timeouts, and resource quotas for API calls, file operations, and compute. Implement circuit breakers for runaway loops.
  • medium Tool Misuse · line 138
    Tool defaults are unsafe or overly permissive (e.g. disabled TLS verification, no authentication, world-writable permissions). Unsafe defaults widen the attack surface.
    Fix: Override unsafe defaults with secure settings (verify=True, auth required, restrictive permissions). Review and harden all tool configurations.
  • medium Excessive Agency · line 167
    Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.
    Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00047 $0.02470
Opus 5.5 $0.00019 $0.00988
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00009 $0.00494
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00247

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 9d3fd8c3b27c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

5 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

skills/sharp-edges/SKILL.md · 290 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 290 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

Read the full file on GitHub · 290 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 290 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 9d3fd8c3b27c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

sharp-edges is a skill published in the GitHub repository waybarrios/opencode-power-pack (541 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 2,470 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

plugin-audit

Audit vercel-plugin performance on real-world projects. Extracts tool calls from Claude Code conversation logs, tests hook matching against actual inputs, identifies pattern coverage gaps, and checks plugin cache staleness. Use when asked to audit, test, or investigate plugin skill injection on a real project.

build-with-dhiraj/ai-workflow-framework-portability-kit · 62 tokens

vercel-agent

Vercel Agent guidance — AI-powered code review, incident investigation, and SDK installation. Automates PR analysis and anomaly debugging. Use when configuring or understanding Vercel's AI development tools.

build-with-dhiraj/ai-workflow-framework-portability-kit · 43 tokens

pith-review

One-shot structured code review. Use when reviewing a PR, diff, file, or function. Format: one line per issue. No summaries. Does not persist.

abhisekjha/pith · 37 tokens

react-best-practices

React best-practices reviewer for TSX files. Triggers after editing multiple TSX components to run a condensed quality checklist covering component structure, hooks usage, accessibility, performance, and TypeScript patterns.

build-with-dhiraj/ai-workflow-framework-portability-kit · 47 tokens

improve-codebase-architecture

Find architecture and refactoring opportunities in a codebase, informed by CONTEXT.md and docs/adr/. Use to decouple modules or improve testability.

build-with-dhiraj/ai-workflow-framework-portability-kit · 38 tokens

code-review-excellence

Effective code review — feedback, bug-catching, knowledge sharing. Use for PR reviews, standards, or mentoring.

build-with-dhiraj/ai-workflow-framework-portability-kit · 27 tokens