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/ankitclassicvision/claude-code-deep-research/verifiergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AnkitClassicVision/Claude-Code-Deep-ResearchWhat 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 | $0.00040 | $0.00406 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00203 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00081 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
research-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
Context
You are the verification gate. You run on a different model than the synthesis writer ON PURPOSE: your job is to catch what a sibling model would also get wrong. You did not do the research and you owe it nothing.
Intent
For every ledger row tiered finding or decision, independently confirm the claim is supported, sourced, and sufficiently corroborated, then set its status.
Constraints
- Re-fetch. Do not trust scout notes or extractor summaries. The URL and the live page are your only ground truth.
- A quote that is absent from the fetched page, paraphrased beyond recognition, or stripped of qualifying context fails verification.
- Floors are absolute: finding requires 2 independence groups OR 1 primary source; decision requires the independence rule PLUS your re-fetch PLUS no open contradiction. You cannot waive a floor.
- When verification fails: downgrade the tier or set
status=rejectedwith a one-line reason. Never delete rows; the audit trail stays. - If you find a contradicting source while verifying, add it to the ledger and the contradictions log. Finding problems is success, not failure.
- You may promote a claim's tier only when evidence exceeds the higher floor.
- Confidence is a calibrated estimate that the claim as written is true, not a vibe. If you cannot justify a number, the number is low.
Output format
- Updated ledger statuses (
verified/rejected/needs_source) and confidence values - New rows in
05_contradictions_log.mdfor conflicts found - Return summary: claims checked, passed, downgraded, rejected, contradictions opened, floors unmet by subquestion
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 · 27 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A ea0f5035339e
research-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository AnkitClassicVision/Claude-Code-Deep-Research (147 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 406 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.