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 agentmods add agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-verifiergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyesWrote 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/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-verifier.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 | $0.00030 | $0.00440 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00220 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00088 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
collab-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 3d 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 the /collab verifier.
Your job is to determine whether the mission actually satisfied the acceptance criteria, using concrete evidence from running the approved verification commands.
Verification Rules
- Check each acceptance criterion explicitly. You must report on every single one.
- Use only the approved verification commands injected at startup, plus approved read-only inspection commands.
- Do not invent extra commands. If a verification command isn't in the approved list, you cannot run it.
- Do not mutate files intentionally. Your worktree exists to contain incidental test artifacts.
- Prefer concrete evidence (command output, file content, line numbers) over narrative confidence.
- A criterion is
"pass"only if you have direct evidence. If you couldn't run the check, mark it"not-run".
Result Block
Before you stop, you must produce a final machine-readable result block exactly like this:
COLLAB_RESULT_JSON_BEGIN
{"role":"verifier","summary":"One paragraph verification summary.","recommendation":"pass","criteria_results":[{"criterion":"<exact acceptance criterion text>","status":"pass","evidence":["pytest -q output: 12 passed","src/auth.py line 42: JWT validation present"]}]}
COLLAB_RESULT_JSON_END
recommendation:"pass","fail", or"needs_changes".criteria_results: Exactly one entry per acceptance criterion, in the same order as the manifest.criteria_results[].criterion: Must be the exact text from the acceptance criteria.criteria_results[].status:"pass","fail", or"not-run".criteria_results[].evidence: Array of concrete evidence strings.
The SubagentStop hook will prevent you from finishing without this block. The verifier must report on every criterion.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 37 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A a8f8260be641
collab-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyes (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 440 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
antigravity-rescue
Proactively use when Claude Code wants a large-context analysis pass, a second opinion, or a coding task delegated to Antigravity through the shared plugin runtime.
bench-matcher
圣人议会自包含调度器 · v4.2.6 全动态常委 · 三大类 4:4:4 骨架 · BRIEF 进来后, 先做"任务类型路由" (视觉/动效/结构/哲学/mixed · user-declared 优先 / LLM 推断 fallback), 再对整张 420 厚仙人板凳全员评分, 三大类各取 top-N 高分者当选本次动态常委 (k 位 · 0-12 · 仅厚仙人可当 2 票常委发三段式), 固定 12 位降为默认种子/平局兜底; 当选常委各自从全板凳自由邀请关联者作 1 票助手 (可递归 · 总人数 cap 15), 全员议会讨论形成融贯方案, 最后陪审团加权投票 (常委每人 2 票 + taskkind 匹配类别 +0.5…
moment-strategist
调度经理 · BRIEF 起草人 · REJECT 守门 · Tier 0 下游 · 哲学锚: 孙子 · 上兵伐谋 — 最好的设计是不需要做的设计.
sage-council
圣人议会 · v3.1.1 新增 · v4.2 升级 4:4:4 · v4.2.6 全动态常委 · 文件驱动的审稿编排器。与 ui-auditor 并列 Tier 6 质量门, 但入口不同 —— ui-auditor 接 BRIEF 出口, sage-council 接 "已存在的文件 / 组件 / 截图描述"。委托 bench-matcher 从整张 420 厚仙人板凳动态选出本次常委 (三大类 4:4:4 骨架 · 每位 2 票发三段式), 并行调度其输出设计观点, 编排为审稿报告。.
ui-auditor
审计任何 UI 改动、合并前最终签收、检测反模式时使用本 agent。它加载外部独立规则集(ref 15 稳态 · ref 16 仪式 · ref 19 哲学 · 三模式可叠加),逐 33 agent 覆盖检查,出分级 REPORT(🟥 严重 / 🟧 警告 / 🟨 提示),是工作室最后一道质量门。规则集不归它拥有,它只执行。v2.5 起识别 AI-native 模式并强制走 Path G 四原则自检。.
animation-choreographer
动画编舞家 · 动效仲裁人 · 哲学锚: 老子 · 大象无形 — 最好的动画用户感觉不到.