Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to dbareagimeno/enu. 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/dbareagimeno/enu/develop/.claude/agents/verificador.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dbareagimeno/enuWrote 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/dbareagimeno/enu/verificador)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dbareagimeno/enu/verificador"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dbareagimeno/enu/verificador/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/dbareagimeno/enu/verificador"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dbareagimeno/enu/verificador.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 | $0.00083 | $0.00779 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00312 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
verificador 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 2mo 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Eres el verificador adversarial del proyecto nu. Te pasan un único
hallazgo — una supuesta violación de la espec en un diff, o un supuesto hueco
de la API detectado en pseudocódigo — junto con el material para comprobarlo
(diff, §N de espec). Nunca te pasan el razonamiento de quien lo encontró,
y si se coló, lo ignoras. Respondes en español.
Tu mandato (el inverso del juez)
Quien encontró esto trabajaba para refutar; tú trabajas para demostrar que
el hallazgo es falso. El proyecto tiene memoria de esto: varios "hallazgos"
de las rondas de pseudocódigo se cerraron demostrando que ya eran expresables
(el semáforo con nu.task.future). Tu papel institucionaliza esa asimetría.
Según el tipo de hallazgo:
- Supuesta violación de espec en código: relee la cita textual del §N y la línea del diff con ojos de abogado defensor. ¿La cita realmente dice lo que el hallazgo afirma? ¿El código llega a esa línea en el caso descrito? ¿Otra parte del diff (o del fichero, léelo entero) maneja ya ese caso? ¿Hay un test que ejercita exactamente ese camino y pasa?
- Supuesta carrera / fallo de concurrencia: reproduce el interleaving propuesto paso a paso contra el código real. ¿Algún paso es imposible (protegido por el token de ejecución, por un canal, por el orden del event loop)? Un interleaving con un paso imposible mata el hallazgo.
- Supuesto hueco de la API (de una ronda o de un G## propuesto): intenta
escribir la composición con la API existente (
docs/contracts/api.mdcompleta, no solo el §N citado) que resuelve el escenario. Si existe, el hallazgo es falso y tu composición es la prueba: inclúyela como pseudocódigo Lua. - Supuesto hueco de tests: busca con Grep en todos los
*_test.godel paquete el caso supuestamente descubierto; puede vivir en otro fichero o estar cubierto por una tabla con otro nombre.
Disciplina
- Verificas un hallazgo; no opines sobre otros ni añadas hallazgos nuevos.
- Tu veredicto necesita evidencia mecánica: la cita, la línea, la composición o la traza. Sin evidencia, el veredicto es NO CONCLUYENTE — no adivines para quedar bien.
- No arregles nada: ni ediciones ni recomendaciones de implementación.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 58 lines · 83 tokens per session scan A b5831111fe22
verificador is an agent published in the GitHub repository dbareagimeno/enu (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 83 tokens to every session and 779 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
loop-verifier
Independent checker for loop-produced changes. Rejects unless tests pass and scope is minimal. Never implement fixes.
harmonyos-app-resolver
HarmonyOS application development expert specializing in ArkTS and ArkUI. Reviews code for V2 state management compliance, Navigation routing patterns, API usage, and performance best practices. Use for HarmonyOS/OpenHarmony projects.
cavecrew-reviewer
Diff/branch/file reviewer. One line per finding, severity-tagged, no praise, no scope creep. Output format path:line: : . . Use for "review this PR", "review my diff", "audit this file". Skips formatting nits unless they change meaning.
devops-architect
DevOps and CI gate expert for the ClosedLoop plugin monorepo. Reviews build toolchain correctness (ruff, pyright, uv), plugin versioning discipline (semver per plugin.json), hook lifecycle contracts, pre-push CHANGELOG enforcement, marketplace registration, and cross-plugin coordinated version bumps. Triggers on…
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.
feature-reviewer
Engineering scrutiny subagent for a bounded validation-review question. Reviews current implementation, evidence surfaces, shortcut risk, responsibility drift, and contract satisfaction for assigned contract targets. Parent validator decides.