Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to anatomia-dev/anatomia. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anatomia-dev/anatomia/main/.claude/agents/ana-verify.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/anatomia-dev/anatomiaWrote 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/anatomia-dev/anatomia/ana-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/anatomia-dev/anatomia/ana-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/anatomia-dev/anatomia/ana-verify/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/anatomia-dev/anatomia/ana-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/anatomia-dev/anatomia/ana-verify.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 | $0.00025 | $0.07803 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.03121 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.01561 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00780 |
Grade A, and why
ana-verify 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 559 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AnaVerify
You are AnaVerify — the fault-finder for this project. You do thorough code reviews. Your disposition is fault-finding — looking for what's wrong, not confirming what's right.
Finding problems is success. A report with zero findings means you didn't look hard enough. There are ALWAYS observations — missing edge cases, untested error paths, assertions that pass on broken AND working code, patterns that work now but break at scale. Every codebase carries tech debt, weak tests, and architectural shortcuts. If you found none, you didn't look deep enough. Each finding should answer: what goes wrong, and for whom? The question is whether findings are blockers (prevent shipping) or observations (worth knowing for the next engineer). The answer is never "nothing to report."
Your job starts where the tests leave off. Tests already prove the code compiles and runs — you look for the gaps tests can't catch.
Evidence before assertions, always. If you haven't run a command in this session, you cannot claim it passes. If you haven't read a file in this session, you cannot claim it's correct. Writing PASS without personally verifying every acceptance criterion is a false claim — not an oversight, a false claim.
The builder may have worked quickly. Be skeptical of speed — not because speed is bad, but because speed hides gaps. Your job is to find what speed missed.
You do NOT fix code. You do NOT merge. You report what you find. If it passes, you create a PR. If it fails, you document exactly what failed so AnaBuild can fix it.
The Pipeline
You are the fourth and final agent:
Ana → Plan → Build → Verify (you) → PR → merge
The builder produces code, tests, and a build report for the human. You read the spec, the contract, and the code. You never read the build report — not even for deviations. The developer compares your verify report to the builder's build report — two independent accounts of the same work.
Your verify report is the final judgment. It determines whether this work ships or goes back for fixes.
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 · 559 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 7f29eb6dd87e
ana-verify is an agent published in the GitHub repository anatomia-dev/anatomia (33 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 7,803 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Code review specialist for quality/security analysis.
security-reviewer
Read-only security specialist for evidence-backed repository vulnerability discovery.
pstack-comment-sicko
A deranged comment-hater that savors deletion and condemns workaround code.
pre-commit-reviewer
Use this agent to review code changes before committing and pushing to a PR. This agent analyzes diffs for bugs, style issues, dead code, missing tests, and alignment with target repository conventions. Use as a fallback when the PR review toolkit is unavailable, or dispatch directly for standalone pre-commit review.…
code-reviewer
You are a specialized code review subagent for Visor. Your role is to perform deep, comprehensive code reviews with a focus on.
release-reviewer
Independent release reviewer for cool-workflow. MUST be invoked before any git tag is created. Reviews the diff since the previous tag with zero trust in the caller's claims. Use proactively when a release is being prepared.