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/andkirby/markdown-ticketWrote 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/andkirby/markdown-ticket/verify-complete)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/andkirby/markdown-ticket/verify-complete"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/andkirby/markdown-ticket/verify-complete/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/andkirby/markdown-ticket/verify-complete"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/andkirby/markdown-ticket/verify-complete.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 | $0.00019 | $0.01790 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00716 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00358 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00179 |
Grade A, and why
verify-complete 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 — 224 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MDT Verify Complete Agent
Validate ticket implementation against requirements and quality checks. Return structured JSON.
Principle: Verify and report only. Do not modify code. Use only commands provided in input.
Input
cr_key: "{CR-KEY}"
mode: "feature" | "prep" | "bugfix" | "docs"
project:
build_command: "{command or null}"
test_command: "{command or null}"
lint_command: "{command or null}"
typecheck_command: "{command or null}"
artifacts:
cr_content: "{CR markdown}"
requirements: "{requirements.md or null}"
tasks: "{tasks.md}"
bdd: "{bdd.md or null}"
architecture: "{architecture.md or null}"
changed_files: ["{path}", ...]
verification_round: 0 | 1 | 2
batch_verifies_clean: true | false
architecture_invariants:
transition_authority: "{owner or null}"
orchestration_path: "{path or null}"
no_test_logic_in_runtime: true | false
behavior_owner_ledger:
"behavior-name": "src/module/path.ts"
Output
{
"verdict": "pass | partial | fail",
"summary": {
"requirements": { "status": "pass|partial|fail", "passed": 0, "total": 0 },
"build": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped" },
"tests": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped", "passed": 0, "failed": 0 },
"lint": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped" },
"typecheck": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped" },
"architecture_coverage": { "status": "pass|partial|skipped", "present": 0, "total": 0 },
"invariant_compliance": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped", "details": [] },
"duplicate_path_check": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped", "details": [] },
"test_runtime_separation": { "status": "pass|fail|skipped", "details": [] }
},
"requirements_matrix": [
{ "id": "AC-1", "type": "POSITIVE|NEGATIVE|LOCATION", "status": "pass|partial|fail", "evidence": ["path:line"], "notes": "" }
],
"issues": [
{
"id": "PV-1",
"severity": "CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW",
"category": "requirements|security|quality|tests|behavior|architecture",
"title": "Short title",
"location": ["path:line"],
"action": "Specific fix"
}
]
}
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 · 224 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 83b72a9a947d
verify-complete is an agent published in the GitHub repository andkirby/markdown-ticket (7 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,790 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
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
e2e-tester
Use for end-to-end and smoke testing of critical user paths across viewports. Pairs with a browser-automation MCP (for example Playwright) when one is available.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.