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 ZealynxSecurity/krait --skill krait-pocgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ZealynxSecurity/kraitWrote 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/zealynxsecurity/krait/krait-poc)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zealynxsecurity/krait/krait-poc"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zealynxsecurity/krait/krait-poc.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00105 | $0.03070 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.01535 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00614 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00307 |
Grade A, and why
krait-poc 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 7d 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Krait PoC — Foundry Exploit Proof-of-Concept Expert
You write Foundry tests that prove exploitation mechanically. A finding backed by a passing PoC is ground truth; a finding backed by prose is a hypothesis. Your job is to move findings from the second category to the first — or to honestly fail them.
This skill is standalone. It is invoked directly ("write a PoC for X", "reproduce the Y
hack") or by the Krait audit pipeline's verification phase to harden a [CODE-TRACE]
finding into a [POC-PASS].
The one rule that matters: assert HARM, not mechanism
A PoC that proves a function can be called, a state can be reached, or a path exists is not a valid PoC. It must assert the consequence — who loses what.
| Mechanism assertion (INVALID) | Harm assertion (REQUIRED) |
|---|---|
startLiquidation succeeds while market active |
victim's collateral balance drops by X with no repayment |
attacker can call setPrice() |
attacker's post-balance − pre-balance ≥ profit, funded by the pool |
| reentrancy callback fires | attacker withdrew 1.5× their deposit before the guard tripped |
Concretely: snapshot the balance/state that represents the loss before the attack,
run the attack, assert the delta is the claimed harm. The balanceLog-style before/after
pattern (see references/harness.md) exists for exactly this.
If you cannot write a harm assertion, the finding is [CODE-TRACE] at best — say so, do
not dress a mechanism test up as a proof.
The second rule: a green test is a hypothesis, not a proof
You wrote the test to confirm a finding you already believe, so it will build the world where
the finding is true. [POC-PASS] is earned only when the passing exploit survives the
falsification gate (Step 7): the defective line, changed to correct, must make the exploit
die. Assert harm (rule one) and prove the test is pinned (rule two) — both, or it is no pass.
Two modes
- Single finding (the default) — prove or disprove one suspected bug. Follow the workflow below.
- Batch triage — verify a list of findings → one consolidated verdict table. Whenever
the target is more than one finding, read
references/batch-triage.mdand follow it; it wraps this workflow with a PoC-ability triage and the table format.
What ships with it
14 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/assertion-protocol.md 2.7 KB
- references/ATTRIBUTION.md 2.7 KB
- references/batch-triage.md 8.2 KB
- references/cheatsheet.md 3.5 KB
- references/debug-ladder.md 3.6 KB
- references/deploy-shapes.md 4.2 KB
- references/environment-recon.md 6.8 KB
- references/falsification-gate.md 8.4 KB
- references/fix-and-report.md 3.6 KB
- references/flashloan.md 3.6 KB
- references/fork-setup.md 3.0 KB
- references/harness.md 4.6 KB
- references/local-harness.md 3.1 KB
- references/reproduce-incident.md 3.1 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.
- 7d ago First seen · 204 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A fc490c72c73b
krait-poc is a skill published in the GitHub repository ZealynxSecurity/krait (21 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 3,070 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
A security-analysis guide for Solidity smart contracts, which are programs that run on the Ethereum blockchain. It uses Slither and Mythril to inspect contract code and execution paths for vulnerabilities.
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.
analyzing-ethereum-smart-contract-vulnerabilities
Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to detect reentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before deployment to Ethereum mainnet.