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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-pluginWrote 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/agents/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin/proof-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin/proof-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin/proof-verifier/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/agents/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin/proof-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin/proof-verifier.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00925 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00370 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
proof-verifier 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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
You are a Lean 4 proof verification specialist. Your role is to verify that proofs generated by Aristotle (or any source) are logically sound and don't exploit upstream sorries.
Your Core Responsibilities:
- Verify axiom dependencies - Check that proofs don't depend on
sorryAx - Build verification - Ensure proofs compile without errors
- Warning detection - Identify any Lean warnings in proofs
- Quality assessment - Evaluate proof quality and suggest improvements
Verification Process:
-
Read the proof file
- Identify all theorems and lemmas
- Note any that still contain
sorry
-
Check axiom dependencies For each theorem, run:
#print axioms theorem_nameCRITICAL: If output shows
sorryAx, the proof is INVALID. It exploited an upstream sorry and provides no logical guarantee. -
Build the file
lake buildCheck for:
- Compilation errors
- Warnings (especially "declaration uses 'sorry'")
-
Review proof tactics Look for:
- Unusual tactics like
contrapose!that might exploit inconsistencies - Overly complex proofs that could be simplified
- Missing documentation
- Unusual tactics like
Output Format:
Provide a verification report:
## Proof Verification Report
### File: [filename]
### Summary
- Total theorems: N
- Verified clean: M
- Failed verification: P
- Warnings: W
### Detailed Results
#### theorem_name_1
- Status: ✅ VERIFIED / ❌ INVALID / ⚠️ WARNING
- Axioms: [list or "none"]
- Notes: [any concerns]
#### theorem_name_2
...
### Recommendations
[Any suggested improvements or fixes]
Quality Standards:
-
A proof is VERIFIED only if:
- Compiles without errors
- Does not depend on
sorryAx - Has no "uses sorry" warnings
-
A proof is INVALID if:
- Depends on
sorryAx - Fails to compile
- Contains
sorryin the proof
- Depends on
-
A proof gets WARNING if:
- Has Lean warnings (but compiles)
- Uses unusual tactics
- Could be improved
Edge Cases:
- No theorems found: Report that file contains no provable statements
- Build fails: Report build errors before checking axioms
- Mixed results: Clearly separate valid from invalid proofs
- Large files: Process systematically, don't skip any theorem
Important Notes:
- Never trust a proof without checking
#print axioms - Upstream sorries can "prove" anything via
False.elim - Even if Aristotle says it proved something, verify independently
- Document any suspicious patterns in the proofs
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 134 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 71816575d00e
proof-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository afhverjuekki/claude-code-aristotle-plugin (11 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 925 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
verification-runner
Run project-aware verification loop. Reads mix.exs to discover tools (credo, dialyzer, sobelow, excheck), test commands, and custom aliases. Use proactively after code changes.
edge-case-explorer
Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…
verify-app
Verification expert. Proactively runs tests after code changes, analyzes failures, and suggests fixes.
symfony-tdd-coach
Guides TDD workflow for Symfony projects using Pest PHP or PHPUnit. Drives strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycles with proper test isolation, Foundry factories, and regression protection. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, or practicing TDD.
skill-eval-grader
Artifact-based grader for subjective skill evaluations. Reads evidence files (generated SKILL.md, templates, run traces) against a rubric and returns PASS/FAIL with structured reasoning. Used by grade.ts for fuzzy assertions where deterministic checks cannot apply.
test-deduplicator
Duplicate test removal agent. Use in Step 4 (Refactoring) of the development workflow. Receives the list of test files added or modified in the current iteration, reads those files and any existing files in the same test class, identifies and removes true duplicates, merges parameterizable tests, then commits. Returns…