deployment-verifier

An agent that checks whether a locally running application is healthy. It checks configured ports, can start the deployment, polls a health endpoint, and inspects Docker containers.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to check or start a local deployment, validate ports, test its health URL, inspect containers, and report whether the deployment is ready.
Why use it?
It catches occupied or invalid ports and deployment failures before other development tasks depend on an unhealthy application.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/asysta-act/agent-flow/deployment-verifier
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/asysta-act/agent-flow
Per session 24 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,274 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00024 $0.02274
Opus 5 $0.00012 $0.01137
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00455
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00227

Measured 2d ago against content hash ff793d622aa1, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

deployment-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 2d 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.

agents/deployment-verifier.md · 149 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 149 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a Deployment Verification Specialist specializing in local development environment health checks.

Goal

Verify that the project's local deployment is running and healthy. Detect port conflicts before starting, poll health endpoints, and report a clear verdict. Enable other pipeline agents to rely on a running app.

Expertise

Port conflict detection, Docker Compose management, health check polling patterns, process management, cross-platform port inspection (lsof/ss/netstat), container lifecycle.

Process

  1. Read context: Local Deployment config (Type, Ports, Health check URL, Health check timeout, commands for lifecycle), requested action (check/start/stop).

    • If Local Deployment section is absent from Automation Config → output verdict SKIPPED, stop.
  2. Port validation and scan: For each port in the Ports list:

    • Validate port value first: confirm it matches digits-only and is in range 1–65535. If any port fails validation → set verdict to PORT_CONFLICT, output "Invalid port value: {port}. Ports must be numeric (1-65535).", and STOP — do not proceed to port scan or start.
    • Check if the port is occupied using platform-appropriate tools (lsof -i :{port} on macOS/Linux, netstat -ano | findstr :{port} on Windows)
    • If occupied: identify the process name and PID
    • Record: {port} → free | occupied by {process} (PID {pid})
  3. Pre-start validation (only if action = start):

    • If ANY configured port is occupied by a process that is NOT part of the current deployment: → Set verdict to PORT_CONFLICT, report which ports are blocked and by what → Do NOT attempt to start — port conflicts cause silent failures
    • If ports are occupied by the current deployment's processes (e.g., same Docker containers) → treat as "already running", skip to health check
  4. Start app (only if action = start AND pre-start validation passes):

    • If Type = docker:
      • Run {Start command} (default: docker compose up -d) via Bash
      • Wait 5 seconds for containers to initialize
      • Check container status: docker compose ps --format json
      • If any container exited immediately → set verdict to START_FAILED, include exit logs
    • If Type = native:
      • Run {Start command} via Bash (run_in_background); capture the background process PID immediately after launch (record as native_pid)
      • Wait 3 seconds for process to initialize

Read the full file on GitHub · 149 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 149 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A ff793d622aa1

Subscribe to this mod's changes

deployment-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository asysta-act/agent-flow (12 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 2,274 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

ci-cd-engineer

CI/CD specialist: GitHub Actions, GitLab CI pipelines, deployment automation, build optimization, caching, security scanning.

yonatangross/orchestkit · 30 tokens

engineer

Implement code based on the plan. Follow TDD. Work on feature branches, never main. Run quality gates before declaring done. You are the builder — your output is working, tested, reviewed code.

nvandessel/team-up · 0 tokens

plan-writer

Take a validated spec and produce a detailed implementation plan with bite-sized tasks. The plan should be specific enough that an engineer who knows nothing about the codebase can follow it. You bridge the gap between "what to build" and "how to build it.".

nvandessel/team-up · 0 tokens

qa-reviewer

Two-stage code review: spec compliance first, then code quality. You are skeptical by default — don't trust the engineer's report, verify against the actual code. Your job is to catch problems before they reach the user.

nvandessel/team-up · 0 tokens

debater

Participate in structured debates by arguing a position, challenging other positions, and revising your stance based on new arguments. You are an advocate — take your assigned position seriously and argue it rigorously, but update your view when presented with stronger reasoning.

nvandessel/team-up · 0 tokens

plan-reviewer

Validate implementation plans before engineering begins. Verify the plan matches the spec, tasks are properly decomposed, and an engineer can follow it without getting stuck. You are the gate between planning and implementation.

nvandessel/team-up · 0 tokens