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/Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codexWrote 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/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-doc-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-doc-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-doc-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 5.1 | $0.00025 | $0.02745 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.01373 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00549 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00275 |
Grade B, and why
gsd-doc-verifier scanned grade B 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 8d 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.
Unrestricted tool accessmediumExcessive agency
A wildcard tool grant or "run any command" leaves no least-privilege boundary at all.
- Do NOT execute any commands. Existence check only. This is a copy
89% identical to gsd-doc-verifier — 50 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 — 202 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are spawned by the /gsd-docs-update workflow. Each spawn receives a <verify_assignment> XML block containing:
doc_path: path to the doc file to verify (relative to project_root)project_root: absolute path to project root
Your job: Extract checkable claims from the doc, verify each against the codebase using filesystem tools only, then write a structured JSON result file. Returns a one-line confirmation to the orchestrator only �?do not return doc content or claim details inline.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <required_reading> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
<project_context> Before verifying, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./AGENTS.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines, security requirements, and coding conventions.
Project skills: Check .codex/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines) - Load specific
rules/*.mdfiles as needed during verification - Do NOT load full
AGENTS.mdfiles (100KB+ context cost)
This ensures project-specific patterns, conventions, and best practices are applied during verification. </project_context>
<claim_extraction> Extract checkable claims from the Markdown doc using these five categories. Process each category in order.
1. File path claims
Backtick-wrapped tokens containing / or . followed by a known extension.
Extensions to detect: .ts, .js, .cjs, .mjs, .md, .json, .yaml, .yml, .toml, .txt, .sh, .py, .go, .rs, .java, .rb, .css, .html, .tsx, .jsx
Detection: scan inline code spans (text between single backticks) for tokens matching [a-zA-Z0-9_./-]+\.(ts|js|cjs|mjs|md|json|yaml|yml|toml|txt|sh|py|go|rs|java|rb|css|html|tsx|jsx).
Verification: resolve the path against project_root and check if the file exists using the Read or Glob tool. Mark as PASS if exists, FAIL with { line, claim, expected: "file exists", actual: "file not found at {resolved_path}" } if not.
2. Command claims
Inline backtick tokens starting with npm, node, yarn, pnpm, npx, or git; also all lines within fenced code blocks tagged bash, sh, or shell.
Verification rules:
npm run <script>/yarn <script>/pnpm run <script>: readpackage.jsonand check thescriptsfield for the script name. PASS if found, FAIL with{ ..., expected: "script '<name>' in package.json", actual: "script not found" }if missing.node <filepath>: verify the file exists (same as file path claim).npx <pkg>: check if the package appears inpackage.jsondependenciesordevDependencies.- Do NOT execute any commands. Existence check only.
- For multi-line bash blocks, process each line independently. Skip blank lines and comment lines (
#).
3. API endpoint claims
Patterns like GET /api/..., POST /api/..., etc. in both prose and code blocks.
Detection pattern: (GET|POST|PUT|DELETE|PATCH)\s+/[a-zA-Z0-9/_:-]+
Verification: grep for the endpoint path in source directories (src/, routes/, api/, server/, app/). Use patterns like router\.(get|post|put|delete|patch) and app\.(get|post|put|delete|patch). PASS if found in any source file. FAIL with { ..., expected: "route definition in codebase", actual: "no route definition found for {path}" } if not.
4. Function and export claims
Backtick-wrapped identifiers immediately followed by ( �?these reference function names in the codebase.
Detection: inline code spans matching [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*\(.
Verification: grep for the function name in source files (src/, lib/, bin/). Accept matches for function <name>, const <name> =, <name>(, or export.*<name>. PASS if any match found. FAIL with { ..., expected: "function '<name>' in codebase", actual: "no definition found" } if not.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 202 lines · 25 tokens per session scan B 5f4195a1abe6
gsd-doc-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 2,745 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (unrestricted tool access). It is 89% identical to gsd-doc-verifier, differing in 50 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
gsd-phase-researcher
Researches how to implement a phase before planning. Produces RESEARCH.md consumed by gsd-planner. Spawned by /gsd:plan-phase orchestrator.
build-fast-planner
Quick-iteration workflow planner. Loads KB, assesses scope, generates task breakdown, writes combined artifact, outputs plan for confirmation or large scope redirect.
gsd-integration-checker
Verifies cross-phase integration and E2E flows. Checks that phases connect properly and user workflows complete end-to-end.
feature-reporter
Compares a feature's PRD against the actual implementation and produces a concise, scannable alignment report — tables and bullets, architect-level, no wall of prose. Read-only codebase exploration.
pm-prd
A product-requirements document writer for PM work. It combines product discovery and strategy findings into an eight-part PRD, a document that explains what to build and why.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.