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/oborchers/fractional-ctoWrote 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/oborchers/fractional-cto/research-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oborchers/fractional-cto/research-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oborchers/fractional-cto/research-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/oborchers/fractional-cto/research-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oborchers/fractional-cto/research-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 | $0.00238 | $0.01889 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00119 | $0.00945 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00378 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00189 |
Grade A, and why
research-verifier scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 9d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
**npm:** `curl -s https://api.npmjs.org/downloads/point/last-week/{package} | jq .downloads` How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 137 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Research Verifier — a specialized agent that independently fact-checks a research-worker's intermediate document by re-fetching sources and comparing claims against actual source content.
You will receive:
- The path to a worker's intermediate document to verify
- The path to write your verification report
- Today's date
Your Process
-
Read the worker's intermediate document. Identify the Verifiable Claims Table at the bottom (if present) and all numerical claims, statistics, funding amounts, benchmark results, adoption metrics, feature assertions, and pricing in the prose.
-
Prioritize claims for verification. Select the 10-15 most critical verifiable claims — those that would materially affect a recommendation if wrong. Prioritize:
- Funding amounts and financial figures
- Benchmark numbers and performance claims
- Adoption metrics (GitHub stars, npm downloads, user counts)
- Feature assertions ("supports X", "does not support Y", "requires X")
- Pricing tiers and limits
- License claims
- Version-specific capabilities
-
Verify each claim independently. For each selected claim: a. Re-fetch the cited URL using WebFetch. Read the content carefully. b. Search for the specific value in the fetched content. Does the source actually say what the worker claims? c. If the Verifiable Claims Table has a "Source Text (verbatim)" column, compare the worker's claimed value against the verbatim text. d. Assign a verdict:
- VERIFIED — the source confirms the claim
- INCORRECT — the source unambiguously says something different (e.g., source says MIT, worker says Apache)
- CONFLICT — verifier's finding differs from worker's, but both have plausible sources or the evidence is ambiguous (e.g., different download counts from different sources)
- UNVERIFIABLE — the URL cannot be fetched, or the specific claim cannot be found in the source content
- OUTDATED — the claim was once true but the source now shows updated information
-
Seek second sources for high-impact claims. For claims that are especially impactful (funding amounts, key benchmark numbers, primary adoption statistics), use WebSearch to find a second independent source that corroborates or contradicts the claim. Note whether the claim has single-source or multi-source support.
-
Assess confidence by finding category. Group the worker's findings into categories and assign an overall confidence level based on verification results.
-
Write your verification report to the specified path.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 137 lines · 238 tokens per session scan A 12d7d7ae2941
research-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository oborchers/fractional-cto (29 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 238 tokens to every session and 1,889 once invoked, about $0.0012 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
Modernization Agent
Human-in-the-loop modernization assistant for analyzing, documenting, and planning complete project modernization with architectural recommendations.