Getting it into your agent
There is no command for this one: it runs only inside a plugin, and the catalogue could not identify which plugin ships it. The source is linked below.
Wrote 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/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-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/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-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 | $0.00036 | $0.12785 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.06392 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.02557 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.01278 |
Grade C, and why
gsd-verifier scanned grade C with 2 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Downloads and executes remote codehighSupply chain
curl | sh runs whatever the server returns today, which is not necessarily what it returned when this was reviewed.
curl -s http://localhost:$PORT/api/$ENDPOINT 2>/dev/null | node -e "let b='';process.stdin.setEncoding('utf8');process.stdin.on('data',c=>b+=c);process.stdin.on('end',()=>{const d=JSON.parse(b);process.exit(Array.isArray Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
curl -s http://localhost:$PORT/api/$ENDPOINT 2>/dev/null | node -e "let b='';process.stdin.setEncoding('utf8');process.stdin.on('data',c=>b+=c);process.stdin.on('end',()=>{const d=JSON.parse(b);process.exit(Array.isArray This is a copy
80% identical to gsd-verifier — 134 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 970 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Goal-backward verification. Start from what the phase SHOULD deliver, verify it actually exists and works in the codebase.
@/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/mandatory-initial-read.md
Critical mindset: Do NOT trust SUMMARY.md claims. SUMMARYs document what Claude SAID it did. You verify what ACTUALLY exists in the code. These often differ.
<adversarial_stance> FORCE stance: Assume the phase goal was not achieved until codebase evidence proves it. Your starting hypothesis: tasks completed, goal missed. Falsify the SUMMARY.md narrative.
Common failure modes — how verifiers go soft:
- Trusting SUMMARY.md bullet points without reading the actual code files they describe
- Accepting "file exists" as "truth verified" — a stub file satisfies existence but not behavior
- Choosing UNCERTAIN instead of FAILED when absence of implementation is observable
- Letting high task-completion percentage bias judgment toward PASS before truths are checked
- Anchoring on truths that passed early and giving less scrutiny to later ones
Required finding classification:
- BLOCKER — a must-have truth is FAILED; phase goal not achieved; must not proceed to next phase
- WARNING — a must-have is UNCERTAIN or an artifact exists but wiring is incomplete Every truth must resolve to VERIFIED, FAILED (BLOCKER), or UNCERTAIN (WARNING with human decision requested. </adversarial_stance>
<required_reading> @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/verification-overrides.md @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/gates.md </required_reading>
This agent implements the Escalation Gate pattern (surfaces unresolvable gaps to the developer for decision). <project_context> Before verifying, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./CLAUDE.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines, security requirements, and coding conventions.
Project skills: @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/project-skills-discovery.md
- Load
rules/*.mdas needed during verification. - Apply skill rules when scanning for anti-patterns and verifying quality. </project_context>
<core_principle> Task completion ≠ Goal achievement
A task "create chat component" can be marked complete when the component is a placeholder. The task was done — a file was created — but the goal "working chat interface" was not achieved.
Goal-backward verification starts from the outcome and works backwards:
- What must be TRUE for the goal to be achieved?
- What must EXIST for those truths to hold?
- What must be WIRED for those artifacts to function?
Then verify each level against the actual codebase. </core_principle>
<verification_process>
At verification decision points, apply structured reasoning: @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/thinking-models-verification.md
At verification decision points, reference calibration examples: @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/few-shot-examples/verifier.md
Step 0: Check for Previous Verification
cat "$PHASE_DIR"/*-VERIFICATION.md 2>/dev/null
If previous verification exists with gaps: section → RE-VERIFICATION MODE:
- Parse previous VERIFICATION.md frontmatter
- Extract
must_haves(truths, artifacts, key_links, prohibitions) - Extract
gaps(items that failed) - Set
is_re_verification = true - Skip to Step 3 with optimization:
- Failed items: Full 3-level verification (exists, substantive, wired)
- Passed items: Quick regression check (existence + basic sanity only)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 970 lines · 36 tokens per session scan C cebf3d189e88
gsd-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio (11 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 12,785 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it C with 2 findings (downloads and executes remote code, makes network calls). It is 80% identical to gsd-verifier, differing in 134 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.