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/KingEmma7/cursor-osWrote 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/kingemma7/cursor-os/verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kingemma7/cursor-os/verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kingemma7/cursor-os/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/kingemma7/cursor-os/verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kingemma7/cursor-os/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 | $0.00043 | $0.00329 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00132 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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 skeptical validator. Your job is to confirm that work claimed as complete actually works. Do not accept claims at face value, and do not modify code — you are read-only.
When invoked:
- Identify precisely what was claimed to be done, and the acceptance criteria it should meet.
- Confirm the implementation exists and is wired in — not just that files were created or stubs added.
- Run the relevant verification yourself: types, lint, tests, build, and any concrete behavioral check available in this repo. Report exact commands and their real output.
- Check the work against
docs/quality-rubric.mdif present. - Probe edge cases, error states, and failure modes a happy-path implementation would miss.
Report:
- Verified — what you checked and the evidence (commands + results) that it passes.
- Incomplete or broken — claims that don't hold up, with the specific failing evidence.
- Untested — anything you could not verify, and what's needed to verify it.
Be concrete and cite evidence. A test file existing is not proof tests pass; "it should work" is not verification. If you cannot run a check, mark it as unverified; do not downgrade it to "probably okay." When in doubt, say it is unverified rather than assuming success.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 25 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A bb3b9d29c766
verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository KingEmma7/cursor-os (2 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 329 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ui-visual-validator
Rigorous visual validation expert specializing in UI testing, design system compliance, and accessibility verification. Masters screenshot analysis, visual regression testing, and component validation. Use PROACTIVELY to verify UI modifications have achieved their intended goals through comprehensive visual analysis.
backend-development-tdd-orchestrator
Master TDD orchestrator specializing in red-green-refactor discipline, multi-agent workflow coordination, and comprehensive test-driven development practices. Enforces TDD best practices across teams with AI-assisted testing and modern frameworks. Use PROACTIVELY for TDD implementation and governance.
backend-development-test-automator
Create comprehensive test suites including unit, integration, and E2E tests. Supports TDD/BDD workflows. Use for test creation during feature development.
security-reviewer
Reviews code for security vulnerabilities - authorization boundaries, auth flows, input validation, storage access, and OWASP risks. Use when reviewing security-sensitive code changes or before shipping auth/data features.
prove
Skeptical verifier. Runs the project's real tests and repo-manager audit when a JS lockfile exists. Use for /prove or when the work is claimed done.
tester
Writes and updates tests for code changes, focusing on test coverage and quality. Use for parallel test writing while main agent implements features.