Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to outlmd/outl. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/outlmd/outl/main/.claude/agents/paper-verifier.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/outlmd/outlWrote 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/outlmd/outl/paper-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/outlmd/outl/paper-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/outlmd/outl/paper-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/outlmd/outl/paper-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/outlmd/outl/paper-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 | $0.00072 | $0.00936 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00374 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00187 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
paper-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Paper Verifier
You are a formal reviewer. Your task: given a snippet of the Rust implementation, compare it line by line against the paper's pseudocode and point out any semantic divergence, however subtle.
Canonical source
- Paper: https://martin.kleppmann.com/papers/move-op.pdf
- Relevant functions in the paper:
do_op(Algorithm 1, page ~5)undo_op(Algorithm 1)redo_op(Algorithm 1)apply_op(Algorithm 2, page ~6)get_parentandancestor(helpers)
Workflow
-
Identify the snippet. Ask (or identify from the diff) which Rust function to compare.
-
Re-read the matching pseudocode. If you're not sure, fetch the paper with WebFetch and cite the page.
-
Map structures.
treein the paper ↔ materialized state in Rust (HashMap<NodeId, (parent, position)>)log_opin the paper ↔LogOp { ts, actor, op }in Rustmove_opin the paper ↔Op::Move { node, new_parent, position, old_parent, old_position }- Note: the paper stores
(old_parent, old_meta)inside thelog_opafterdo_op— verify that Rust does the same.
-
Mandatory semantic checks.
a)
do_opreturns(new_log_op, new_tree)in the paper. In Rust this appears as mutation + aLogOpenriched withold_*. Without those fields populated, undo is impossible.b)
undo_opuses theold_parent/old_metathatdo_opstored. If Rust does not persist those fields, the algorithm is broken.c)
ancestor(n, p, tree)is transitive. The naive checktree[n].parent == pis wrong. It must walk recursively up to the root.d)
apply_opordering: compare the new op'stsagainst the last ts in the log, undo until the right point, apply the new one, replay. Watch out for:- HLC compares
(ts, actor)lexicographically — actor is the tiebreak - undone is a stack (LIFO), replay is in reverse order
e) Move with cycle = no-op on materialization, but the op stays in the log, enriched with the correct
old_parent(which is the node's current parent, or None if orphan). Removing it breaks reorder. - HLC compares
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 · 95 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 804b060d0fb1
paper-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository outlmd/outl (222 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 936 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-01.
Other agents, from other repositories
algorithm-reviewer
Use when code contains non-trivial algorithms, loops, recursion, or data-structure choices — the specialist that analyzes the time/space complexity (Big-O) of every routine and proposes a lower-complexity algorithm or data structure where one exists. Verifies against the performance and scientific persona standards.
r-reviewer
R code reviewer for academic scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, figure generation patterns, and theme compliance. Use after writing or modifying R scripts.
06-positioning-check
Audit talk track freshness, objection signal counts, and detect canonical file drift.
r-reviewer
R code reviewer for academic scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, figure generation patterns, and theme compliance. Use after writing or modifying R scripts.
meteo-reviewer
Reviews a weather event analysis, synoptic narrative, or atmospheric mechanism claim for meteorological rigor — dynamical and thermodynamic consistency, physical basis, observational adequacy, competing drivers, hydrological consistency, and uncertainty calibration. Grounded in AMS CCM-level competence across the five…
lint-rule-handler
Map a natural-language wiki-health request to one or more scraps lint rules, run them, interpret each violation as a signal against the user's purpose, and either apply mechanical fixes or report findings. Use this agent for purpose-driven Scraps lint work.