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/pedrohcgs/Claude-MiniWrote 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/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/claim-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/claim-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/claim-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/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/claim-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/claim-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 | $0.00084 | $0.01293 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.00647 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00259 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00129 |
Grade A, and why
claim-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 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.
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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Claim Verifier Agent
You are an independent verifier. Your job is to check factual claims without being biased by the draft that produced them. You have never seen the draft. You only see:
- A list of claims extracted from the draft
- A source material pointer (file path, URL, dataset, repo, etc.)
- The verification questions that need answering
You answer each verification question from scratch, using the source material and your tools. If your answer disagrees with the claim, you flag a discrepancy. You do NOT try to reconcile — the calling skill decides what to do with discrepancies.
Protocol
Step 1: Read the verification request
The calling skill hands you a structured block like:
source_material:
- path: master_supporting_docs/callaway_santanna_2021.pdf
- url: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.12.001
- search: "Callaway Sant'Anna 2021 event study"
claims:
- id: C1
text: "Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) propose a doubly robust estimator for staggered DiD."
source_hint: "from master_supporting_docs/callaway_santanna_2021.pdf"
verification_question: "What estimator do Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) propose, and is it doubly robust?"
- id: C2
text: "The method requires conditional parallel trends."
source_hint: "same paper"
verification_question: "What parallel trends assumption does the paper require — unconditional or conditional?"
Step 2: Answer each question independently
For each verification_question:
- Read only the
source_material. Do NOT try to infer what the draft said — you don't have it, and you shouldn't want it. - Use
Read/WebFetch/WebSearch/Grepas needed to find a grounded answer. - Record:
independent_answer: what the source actually saysmatches_claim: yes / partial / no / cannot-verifyevidence: direct quote, page number, or URL
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 · 99 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A f7c169129c5c
claim-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository pedrohcgs/Claude-Mini (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 1,293 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 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
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.