Reviewdog
AgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit
Automated code review and security linting integration for CI/CD pipelines using reviewdog.
Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it.
Install Security Architecture Review
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-review --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .claude/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .claude/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-reviewType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-review --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .agents/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .agents/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-review --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .cursor/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .cursor/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git --path plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-review --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .gemini/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .gemini/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-reviewInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .github/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .github/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install cbrock84/headcount security-architecture-review --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review .opencode/skills/security-architecture-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "security-architecture-review" agent skill from https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review into .opencode/skills/security-architecture-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "security-architecture-review", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
security-architecture-review- GitHub stars
- 2k
- Token cost
- ~1.1k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 614 words
- Files
- 2 (incl. references)
- Skills in repo
- 178
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it.
- Tasks that involve Software architecture
- SKILL.md covers Review in this order, Reviewing a change rather than…, Sources and Tooling, plus 3 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Tasks that involve Static analysis and SAST
What it does
Security Architecture Review is an agent skill from cbrock84/headcount. Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it. Use this to review an architecture or pull request for security, set secure coding standards, choose or tune SAST and DAST tooling, assess a third-party integration, or decide whether a design is safe to build.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.1k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 2 other files, including reference files (for example `references/sources.md`).
It sits in Security, covering Software architecture, Static analysis and SAST and Secure coding. The repository describes itself as: An agent organization structured as a company — 15+ departments, 125+ skills, each independently installable, citing the standards and regulators that settle the question. Runs… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Tasks that involve Software architecture
- Tasks that involve Static analysis and SAST
- Tasks that involve Secure coding
Example prompts
- “Use the security-architecture-review skill to review a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data…”
- “/security-architecture-review”
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 98d1c17. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Security Architecture Review loads about 1.1k tokens when it runs, and up to ~1.8k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 104 tokens; SKILL.md has 614 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from cbrock84/headcount at commit 98d1c17, republished under its MIT licence (© cbrock84). 614 words, ~1,094 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/security-architecture-review/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 1 other file; get the full folder from GitHub.- name
- security-architecture-review
- description
- Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it. Use this to review an architecture or pull request for security, set secure coding standards, choose or tune SAST and DAST tooling, assess a third-party integration, or decide whether a design is safe to build.
Security architecture review
Review in this order
Attention spent in this order finds the most consequential problems first.
1. Authentication. How identity is established, how sessions are represented, how they expire, what happens on password reset and account recovery. Recovery flows are the most commonly weakest path into an account and the least reviewed.
2. Authorization. The one that matters most and gets least attention. For every endpoint and every object: who is allowed, and where is that checked? The characteristic failure is checking on the way in but not on the object itself, so any authenticated user can reach any record by changing an identifier.
Check multi-tenant isolation explicitly and by test, not by reading. Assume every identifier in a request is attacker-controlled, because it is.
3. Data. What is collected, where it goes, where it rests, and who can read it. Sensitive data in logs, in error responses, in analytics payloads, and in client bundles — all four are routine findings.
4. Input and output. Untrusted input reaching a query, a template, a command, a deserializer, or a URL the server fetches. Parameterize rather than escape. Validate against an allowlist rather than a denylist.
5. Secrets. Never in source, never in client bundles, never in build logs. Rotatable, scoped to what needs them, and with a documented rotation path that someone has actually walked.
6. Dependencies and supply chain. What is pulled in, how it is pinned, how updates are reviewed, and what would happen if a maintainer account were compromised. Lockfiles committed, builds reproducible.
Reviewing a change rather than a design
Look for: new endpoints without an authorization check, new external input, changed authentication or session logic, new dependencies, anything touching cryptography, and anything that widens what a role can do. Everything else is usually lower yield.
Never write your own cryptography. Use the vetted primitives, and be suspicious of any diff that implements a comparison, a token, or a signature by hand.
Sources
references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
Show full SKILL.md (232 more words)Show less
Tooling
- SAST catches classes of bug cheaply and produces false positives at volume. Tune it or the team will learn to ignore it, which is worse than not running it.
- DAST and dependency scanning find different things; neither replaces review.
- Secret scanning in CI and pre-commit is the highest-value automation per unit of effort.
By name today: Semgrep, CodeQL, or SonarQube for SAST; Snyk, Dependabot, or Trivy for dependencies; Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP for DAST; gitleaks, TruffleHog, or GitHub secret scanning for secrets — and similar in each category.
Automation is a floor, not a review. It finds known patterns, not design flaws — and design flaws are what actually cause the expensive incidents.
Third-party integrations
What data leaves, under what agreement, with what access, and what happens if they are breached. Scope credentials to the minimum, prefer short-lived tokens, and know how to revoke without an outage.
Never
- Approve a design on the promise of a control with no named owner and no date.
- Accept "it is internal" as an authorization boundary.
- Review the diagram instead of the change. Read what is actually being built.
- Sign off on a third-party integration without knowing what data leaves and under what terms.
Return contract
Findings by severity, each with: the concrete attack, what the attacker gains, whether it blocks release, and the specific fix. A finding with no attack path stated is a preference.
© cbrock84, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
SKILL.md and 1 other file (references) in plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review of cbrock84/headcount.
- SKILL.md
- references/sources.md
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 98d1c17
Compare with similar skills
Security Architecture Review next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Security Architecture Review this skillcbrock84/headcount | 2k | — | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| ReviewdogAgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit | 220 | 1 repos | ~3k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Coderabbit Security Basicsjeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace | 2.8k | — | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Security Review ChecklistZeroDeng01/sublinkPro | 1.7k | — | ~2.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Hadolint Dockerfile Security LintingAgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit | 220 | 1 repos | ~4.4k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Security Vulnerabilities Patcheraxelixlabs/axelix | 148 | — | ~4.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | LGPL-3.0 |
Similar skills
Coderabbit Security Basics
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace
Configure and audit security review capabilities as one layer in a defense-in-depth pull-request program.
Security Review Checklist
ZeroDeng01/sublinkPro
Checklist-driven security review for changes to authentication, authorization, MFA, secrets, input validation and other security-critical code.
Hadolint Dockerfile Security Linting
AgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit
Lints Dockerfiles with Hadolint for security misconfigurations and best-practice violations, locally and in CI, with strict, balanced and permissive rule templates.
Security Vulnerabilities Patcher
axelixlabs/axelix
Create batched Dependabot-style pull requests for GitHub security findings in axelixlabs/axelix, grouped by dependency surface such as master/front-end, master/build.gradle.kts, or starter Gradle…
Codewhale Security Review
codewhale-hq/Codewhale
Reviews a diff, module or network surface for exploitable defects, mapping trust boundaries and sinks, then reports only findings with a verified reachable path and a fix.
More from cbrock84/headcount
All 178 skills in this repoAgent Hierarchy
cbrock84/headcount
Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a…
Access And Identity
cbrock84/headcount
Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process.
Account Based Marketing
cbrock84/headcount
Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group…
Activation
cbrock84/headcount
Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account.
AI ML Governance
cbrock84/headcount
Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire.
AI Research Analyst
cbrock84/headcount
Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit.
Related
Categories
Questions about Security Architecture Review
What does Security Architecture Review do?
Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it. Security Architecture Review is an agent skill from cbrock84/headcount. Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it.
When should I use Security Architecture Review?
Security Architecture Review fits situations like: tasks that involve Software architecture; tasks that involve Static analysis and SAST; tasks that involve Secure coding.
How do I install Security Architecture Review in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review in cbrock84/headcount) into .claude/skills/security-architecture-review in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Security Architecture Review in Codex?
Run `npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (plugins/security/skills/security-architecture-review in cbrock84/headcount) into .agents/skills/security-architecture-review in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Security Architecture Review in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill security-architecture-review -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/security-architecture-review, .gemini/skills/security-architecture-review, .github/skills/security-architecture-review and .opencode/skills/security-architecture-review in your project.
What does Security Architecture Review need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Security Architecture Review is instructions for the agent only.
Does Security Architecture Review access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Security Architecture Review safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Security Architecture Review use?
Security Architecture Review is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Security Architecture Review use?
About 1.1k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 4.4k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 685 tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.
What are the alternatives to Security Architecture Review?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Security Architecture Review: Reviewdog (AgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit, 220 stars), Coderabbit Security Basics (jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace, 2.8k stars), Security Review Checklist (ZeroDeng01/sublinkPro, 1.7k stars) and Hadolint Dockerfile Security Linting (AgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit, 220 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Security Architecture Review?
cbrock84 (a GitHub user) maintains it in cbrock84/headcount, which has 2,022 GitHub stars. The repository holds 178 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 17, 2026.
Source: cbrock84/headcount on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.