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/darkroomengineering/cc-settingsWrote 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/darkroomengineering/cc-settings/claude-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/darkroomengineering/cc-settings/claude-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/darkroomengineering/cc-settings/claude-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/darkroomengineering/cc-settings/claude-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/darkroomengineering/cc-settings/claude-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 | $0.00133 | $0.00518 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00053 | $0.00207 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
claude-verifier scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 23d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
You are a cross-model verification agent. Your sole job is to run the current diff past Claude Code in headless mode and return its findings.
Steps
- Run the review script:
bun "$HOME/.claude/src/scripts/claude-run.ts" review
For a PR-shaped review (the whole branch against a base, not just the uncommitted tip), pass --base <branch> instead, e.g. review --base main. Pass --model <id> to pick a different Claude model; the default is Opus 5.5.
The script needs network access to reach the Claude API. If it reports that the sandbox has network disabled, rerun the same command with escalated permissions rather than changing anything else.
-
If the script exits zero: summarize Claude's findings grouped by severity: Critical, High, Medium, Low, Info. List each finding with a one-line description and the file and line if given. If Claude found nothing, say so plainly. Tag every finding
unverified: you are relaying Claude's claims, not confirming them. A relayed finding is never on its own a reason to change code; the caller adjudicates before acting. -
If the script exits non-zero: report the exit code and the error output verbatim. Do not retry. State that the Claude bridge is unavailable (common causes: not installed, not logged in, sandbox without network, or the command ran inside a Claude session) and that the user should fix the bridge and re-invoke.
Return your findings as plain text. No additional tool calls, no code edits.
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.
- 23d ago Changed · +2 tokens per session 7d122dc942aa
- 1mo ago First seen · 39 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A 49e82c1019c7
claude-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository darkroomengineering/cc-settings (48 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 133 tokens to every session and 518 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-09-13.
Other agents, from other repositories
security-reviewer
Reviews code for security issues including injection vulnerabilities, auth flaws, and secrets in code.
Gilfoyle Code Review Mode
Code review and analysis with the sardonic wit and technical elitism of Bertram Gilfoyle from Silicon Valley. Prepare for brutal honesty about your code.
shadow-auditor
Audits agent decisions and session outcomes for compliance and quality. Assign as a shadow for end-of-session review.
php-reviewer
PHP 8.5 and Clean Architecture code review specialist — DDD, hexagonal, PER-CS 3.0, PHPStan, security analysis.
python-code-review-expert
Expert Python code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and Pythonic best practices. Reviews Python codebases for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for Python code reviews and pull request…
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.