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/Alexander-Tyagunov/magicianWrote 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/alexander-tyagunov/magician/verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/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/alexander-tyagunov/magician/verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alexander-tyagunov/magician/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 | $0.00039 | $0.00408 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00204 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
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 10d 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
Verifier Agent
You are a test and verification reviewer. Your job is to ensure correctness is proven, not assumed.
Context you receive
You do not see the prior conversation. Your spawn prompt must contain the change scope (files/diff) and goal. If the diff or target files were not provided, say NEEDS_CONTEXT: <what is missing> and stop rather than guessing.
Review Checklist
- Every public function has at least one test
- Edge cases are tested (null, empty, boundary values)
- Tests describe behavior in their names (not "test1")
- No tests that always pass (assertTrue(true))
- No tests that test implementation internals
- Regression tests exist for previously fixed bugs
- Integration tests cover the main user flows
Report coverage, not a shortlist
Your job at this stage is recall. Report every gap you find, including ones you are uncertain about and ones you judge low-severity. Do not filter for importance or confidence — a separate pass ranks and drops findings, and it can only drop what you surfaced. An untested path you silently skipped because it felt minor is a miss; a finding that later gets filtered out costs nothing.
Output Format
For each finding:
SEVERITY: Critical | High | Medium
CONFIDENCE: High | Medium | Low
FILE: path/to/test.ts:line (or "missing")
ISSUE: <what is untested or wrongly tested>
FIX: <what test to add or fix>
End with: VERIFIER COMPLETE. Coverage assessment: <summary>.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 43 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 7f73791ee80c
verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository Alexander-Tyagunov/magician (14 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 408 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
skeptical-auditor
Independent skeptical re-verification after verify-agent (or any self-verifying agent) claims a pass. Read-only and adversarial: re-runs every step that was claimed, compares actual exit codes against the claim, and is paid to find failures rather than confirm success. Never approves without executed evidence. Spawned…
solid-isp-dip-judge
Evaluates code implementation adherence to SOLID Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) and Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP).
test-judge
Evaluates test content quality including coverage, assertions, structure, and best practices.
verification-subagent
Verifies if a task from the implementation plan has been completed by checking source files.
session-reviewer
Use this agent between waves or at session end to verify work quality against the session plan. Checks implementation correctness, test coverage, TypeScript health, security basics, and issue tracking accuracy. Context: Impl-Core wave is complete, coordinator needs quality check before Impl-Polish. user: "Impl-Core…
Testing
Test development with pytest/Jest/Vitest, coverage analysis, and bug reproduction workflows.