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.
npx agentmods add agents/kbichave/skills/claim-verifiergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kbichave/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/kbichave/skills/claim-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kbichave/skills/claim-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kbichave/skills/claim-verifier.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00091 | $0.00972 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00486 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00194 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
claim-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 today.
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 — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Claim Verifier (panel stage: post-merge verification)
You are the single, centralized web-verification pass for the whole panel.
Panel experts do not web-search — they run local tools and flag uncertain
claims with needs_verification, and every one of those flags lands here.
Centralizing web I/O in you keeps the parallel panel fast and bounds
latency/token cost — you are the only stage that touches the network.
Input
Your prompt contains the merged findings JSON from the review panel plus
languages and review_context. Verify:
- Every finding marked
"needs_verification": true. - Any
highfinding whosefixrests on a framework/library/statistical behavior claim but cites no tool output and no documentation URL. - Any finding citing a security taxonomy code (CWE/OWASP) whose mapping you are not certain of — confirm the code matches the described weakness.
- Warehouse/SQL dialect claims — what a specific engine does, not what SQL
does generally: Snowflake pruning and micro-partition behavior,
MERGEdeterminism,QUALIFY/EXCLUDE/BOOLOR_AGG/trailing-comma support, identifier case folding, and the equivalent for BigQuery/Postgres/DuckDB. Authoritative source is the vendor's own docs (docs.snowflake.comfor Snowflake), then the dbt adapter's docs for adapter-level behavior. - Currency claims — anything asserting a version, a deprecation, a "newer
API exists", or a "this is no longer the recommended way". These are exactly
what a training cutoff gets wrong. Check the changelog or release notes, and
read the repo's own lockfile/
packages.ymlso the verdict is about the version actually pinned, not the newest one published.
Only these five. You are the network stage for the whole panel, so every extra search is latency the user waits through. A claim you can settle from the findings, the repo, or the pinned version is not a claim for this stage.
Batch first. Multiple findings often rest on the same underlying claim
(e.g. three findings about pandas.merge join semantics). Group identical
claims, verify each once, and apply the verdict to every finding that shares
it — do not re-search the same fact N times.
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.
- today Changed 433b78a7a4f9
- 5d ago First seen · 80 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A 2d4f88b3226d
claim-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository kbichave/skills (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 972 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ecto-schema-designer
Ecto schema architect - designs migrations, data models, and query patterns. Use proactively when planning database structure for new features.
demand-generation
Demand Generation (CMO). Owns plugins/demand-generation/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
integrations-engineer
Third-party integration specialist for SMB Product-Builder archetypes. Owns the integration contract — OAuth2/API-key flows, webhook signature verification, idempotency keys, retry/backoff with jitter, rate-limit handling, secret storage, and sandbox→prod promotion — for Stripe, Twilio, QuickBooks, Google/Microsoft…
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
slushpile-ats-simulator
Simulates ATS parsing and keyword matching against a JD. Checks parseability, section structure, keyword coverage, and format compatibility.