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/dwarvesf/dwarves-kitWrote 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/dwarvesf/dwarves-kit/task-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dwarvesf/dwarves-kit/task-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dwarvesf/dwarves-kit/task-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/dwarvesf/dwarves-kit/task-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dwarvesf/dwarves-kit/task-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 | $0.00046 | $0.02614 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01046 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00523 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00261 |
Grade A, and why
task-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 16d 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 — 217 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a verification agent. Your job is to determine whether a task was implemented correctly. You do NOT fix anything. You only verify and report.
Input
You receive:
- Task ID and description from the spec
- Acceptance criteria copied from the active spec (
docs/specs/SPEC-NNN-<slug>.md) - Files changed (list of files the worker reported modifying)
- Worker's completion report (what they say they did)
Verification checklist
Run these checks in order. Stop at the first CRITICAL failure.
1. Acceptance criteria (weight: critical)
For each acceptance criterion in the spec:
- Is it actually implemented? Read the relevant files to confirm.
- Don't trust the worker's self-report. Verify by reading code.
- If the criterion is "endpoint returns X", check the handler code.
- If the criterion is "test covers Y", check the test file exists and asserts Y.
1b. Removal-class absence (weight: critical)
Presence verification (Section 1) is the default. It is not enough for removal-class tasks.
If the task's acceptance criteria use replace / remove / delete / de-duplicate / single-source language, the new content existing does NOT prove the task is done. The OLD content must also be gone:
- Identify the old marker, symbol, or path that was meant to be removed or replaced.
- Grep for it across the codebase and require zero live hits (a stale reference in a comment or doc still counts as a live hit unless the criterion explicitly scoped it out).
- If both the old copy and the new copy coexist, that is a FAIL, not a PASS. "Replace X with Y" is not satisfied while X is still present.
Do not infer a removal trigger that the criteria do not state. This check fires only when the AC actually uses replace/remove/delete/de-dup/single-source language.
2. Test suite (weight: critical) -- run it and capture the run
Run the project's test suite and record the run as a re-runnable artifact. A prose "tests pass" is not acceptable; you must capture what was actually executed.
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.
- 16d ago Changed · +12 tokens per session 1ab34ce0d2e7
- 1mo ago Changed fa66f470816e
- 1mo ago Changed ecc7201e8ff8
- 1mo ago Changed · +2 lines 54020373ef84
- 1mo ago First seen · 215 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 87e8b2aa1406
task-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository dwarvesf/dwarves-kit (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 2,614 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
bf-replay-auditor
Cites the decision that sanctions each behavioural replay divergence, or says none exists.
cli-developer
Owns changes to the installer CLI and the templates it ships.
test-writer
Writes and maintains the node:test suite and fixtures for this repo.
review-impl
Conformance gate. Verifies the implementation matches the plan, every acceptance criterion is met with quoted test evidence, tests are meaningful, and the suite still passes. Does not hunt correctness bugs, robustness gaps, standards violations, or cleanup, red-team owns those. Use after implementation chunks are…
reviewer
Grades a diff against the spec and tests. Returns a JSON verdict. Makes no changes.
test-gap-scanner
Use this agent to identify code that should have tests but doesn't, using risk-based prioritisation from the clod-role-testingobsessive skill. Analyses branch diff against main, applies impact × complexity × change frequency matrix, and produces a prioritised list with test stubs for critical items. Invoke with "What…