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/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/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/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-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 | $0.00030 | $0.00440 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00176 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 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.
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.
- 1mo 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 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 440 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
bench-matcher
A task-routing and voting system that selects a changing group of specialist agents to discuss a request and agree on a result.
moment-strategist
A Chinese-language planning and coordination agent whose description identifies it as a manager, brief writer, and rejection gate.
sage-council
A file-based review coordinator that selects a changing panel of reviewers and combines their design feedback into a report. It reviews existing files, components, or screenshot descriptions rather than starting from a brief.
ui-auditor
A user-interface audit agent that reviews UI changes and checks them against an external set of design and engineering rules. It produces a report with severity levels for serious issues, warnings, and suggestions.
animation-choreographer
An agent role for making decisions about animation and motion.
debunk-auditor
An AI auditing role based on Wang Chong's criticism of false claims.