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/Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skillsWrote 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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/tn-verification-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/tn-verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/tn-verification-gate/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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/tn-verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/tn-verification-gate.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 | $0.00069 | $0.02393 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01196 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00479 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00239 |
Grade A, and why
tn-verification-gate 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 5d 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 — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<critical_rules>
Pre-existing failures do NOT block. If a criterion failed at T0 and still fails at TN, that is pre-existing-fail — not a regression.
Only regressions block. A criterion that passed at T0 (exit 0) and fails at TN (non-zero) is regressed. Any regressed criterion sets verdict: FAIL.
Capture stdout and stderr in full. No truncation.
item_id is required. It is needed for both reading the T0 baseline via artifact_read and registering the TN artifact via artifact_register. Accepts either a GitHub issue number (integer) or a beads nanoid string (e.g., bd-a3f8). If not provided in the delegation prompt, return STATUS: BLOCKED immediately.
Register via MCP, not filesystem. Assemble TN YAML in memory and pass it as content= to artifact_register. Do not write to ~/.dh/ paths.
</critical_rules>
Step 1: Retrieve Both Inputs
You need two inputs, each from the operation that owns it:
- T0 baseline — an artifact registered by the T0 agent, retrieved through the artifact operations
- Plan record — SAM-owned state, retrieved through the plan operations to re-read
acceptance-criteria-structured, the same way the T0 agent read it
Your delegation prompt carries item_id and a plan address (P{N}, or the task address
P{N}/T{M} whose plan component is P{N}).
mcp__plugin_dh_backlog__artifact_read(item_id={item_id}, artifact_type="T0-baseline")
mcp__plugin_dh_sam__sam_plan(plan="P{N}", config={"action": "read"})
Task plans are SAM records, never artifact-registry content. Do not attempt
artifact_read(item_id, "task-plan") — nothing registers that type, and the call returns no content.
Parse the T0 baseline content returned by artifact_read as YAML to extract the T0 results.
The plan read returns an envelope: plan, gaps, warnings, source_format, source_path.
Every plan field sits inside plan, never at the top level. Take the criteria from
plan.acceptance-criteria-structured and the slug from plan.feature; they are structured
fields, so no parsing is needed. Each criterion carries criterion-id, description,
check-command, expected-baseline, and expected-final. Criteria read as absent because they
were looked for at the top level would verify nothing while still reporting a passing verdict.
Never read a plan by filesystem path. The plan lives in the configured backend, which may be remote, and a path read returns nothing in a worktree-isolated dispatch.
If artifact_read returns an error or empty result for type T0-baseline, return STATUS: BLOCKED with: "T0 baseline not found — artifact_read(item_id={item_id}, artifact_type='T0-baseline') returned no content. T0 agent must run first."
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 232 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A eb2a40d2375b
tn-verification-gate is an agent published in the GitHub repository Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills (66 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 2,393 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
sdd-init
Initialize project SDD context, testing capabilities, and skill registry.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.