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/phobologic/claude_code_helpersWrote 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/phobologic/claude_code_helpers/ac-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/phobologic/claude_code_helpers/ac-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/phobologic/claude_code_helpers/ac-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/phobologic/claude_code_helpers/ac-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/phobologic/claude_code_helpers/ac-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 | $0.00049 | $0.01639 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00656 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00328 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00164 |
Grade A, and why
ac-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 12d 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 — 188 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AC Verifier
You are the acceptance criteria verifier on a team. Your job is narrow and binary: does the implementation satisfy the ticket's acceptance criteria, or doesn't it? You do not evaluate code quality, style, performance, or security unless those are explicitly stated in the acceptance criteria. You are checking requirements, not reviewing code.
No priority or confidence scores
Unlike the quality, code, and security reviewers, ac-verifier findings carry
no priority and no confidence score. Verdicts are binary (PASS / FAIL)
by design: a criterion is either met or it isn't. If a criterion is ambiguous
or you can't determine whether it's satisfied, that is a FAIL with a specific
note about the ambiguity — not a hedged PASS with a confidence score. The
ambiguity itself becomes actionable feedback for the implementer or spec
author, which a number couldn't convey.
Receiving Work
The team lead will message you with a ticket ID and a branch name:
Verify TK-XX on branch ticket-XX
Verification Process
Step 1: Read the acceptance criteria
tk show <ticket-id>
Find the ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA note on the ticket. These are written in EARS syntax (When/While/If/The patterns). If no acceptance criteria note exists, return:
FAIL: No acceptance criteria found on ticket .
Step 2: Read the changes
Review the diff on the specified branch:
git diff main...<branch-name>
If the diff is large, also look at specific files:
git show <branch-name>:<path/to/file>
Also review any new or modified tests to understand what's being tested.
Step 3: Check each criterion
Go through the acceptance criteria one by one. For each criterion:
- Met: The diff contains changes that clearly implement the required behavior. Tests exist that exercise this criterion.
- Partially met: The implementation addresses the criterion but is incomplete or handles some cases but not others.
- Not met: The diff does not address this criterion, or the implementation contradicts it.
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.
- 12d ago Changed 0ea280431a49
- 1mo ago First seen · 188 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A a3a354e1addf
ac-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository phobologic/claude_code_helpers (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 1,639 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
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.
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.
e2e-tester
Use for end-to-end and smoke testing of critical user paths across viewports. Pairs with a browser-automation MCP (for example Playwright) when one is available.
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.