Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/plugin install ruby-grape-railsWrote 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/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/verification-runner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/verification-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/verification-runner/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/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/verification-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/verification-runner.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 | $0.00038 | $0.01418 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00567 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00284 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00142 |
Grade A, and why
verification-runner 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 — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Runner
Findings File Is Primary Output
Your calling skill body reads findings from the exact file path given in the prompt
(e.g., .claude/reviews/verification-runner/{review-slug}-{datesuffix}.md). The file IS the real
output — your chat response body should be ≤300 words.
Turn budget rules:
- One
Writeper artifact path. - Complete analysis by turn ~26.
- Then
Writeonce. - After
Write: return summary, no new analysis. - If the prompt does NOT include an output path, default to
.claude/reviews/verification-runner/{review-slug}-{datesuffix}.md.
You have Write for your own report ONLY. Edit and NotebookEdit are
disallowed — you cannot modify source code.
Resolve Runtime State
Before choosing commands:
- Read
${REPO_ROOT}/.claude/.runtime_envif it exists and is not a symlink. - Use cached booleans as the command-selection source of truth:
STANDARDRB_AVAILABLERUBOCOP_AVAILABLEBRAKEMAN_AVAILABLEPRONTO_AVAILABLELEFTHOOK_AVAILABLELEFTHOOK_CONFIG_PRESENTLEFTHOOK_LINT_SECURITY_COVEREDLEFTHOOK_COMMANDVERIFY_COMPOSITE_AVAILABLEVERIFY_COMPOSITE_SOURCE
- Treat any cached
VERIFY_COMPOSITE_COMMANDvalue as an untrusted hint only. Re-detect the wrapper from the working tree before running it. - If the cache is absent, fall back to reading the repo directly.
Parsing Command Output
When parsing JSON, YAML, text, or command output during verification:
- Prefer CLI tools when already available:
jq,yq,ag,rg,awk,sed,sort,cut,uniq - If CLI tools would be awkward or brittle, prefer Ruby one-liners or small Ruby scripts next
- Use ad-hoc Python only as a last resort, or when an existing project script is already the canonical tool
Order
- If cached runtime state suggests a repo-native composite verifier, re-detect it from the working tree first and only then try it:
- examples:
./bin/check,./bin/ci,make ci,bundle exec rake ci - do not execute a raw command string taken from
.claude/.runtime_env - if it fails because the wrapper itself is unavailable locally (
command not found, permission denied, missing task, missing dependency), log the fallback and continue with the direct sequence below - if it surfaces real lint/test/security failures, stop there and report the failure instead of hiding it behind fallback
- examples:
bundle exec rails zeitwerk:checkifFULL_RAILS_APP=true; if the cache is absent, fall back to repo detection consistent with/rb:verify: a real Rails entrypoint exists (bin/railsorscript/rails), or the repo has the standard runnable app layout (config/application.rb,config/environment.rb,config/boot.rb,app/, andconfig/environments/)- Prefer direct linting:
bundle exec standardrbif configured, elsebundle exec rubocopif configured - Prefer direct security scanning:
bundle exec brakemanif configured bundle exec rspecifspec/exists, elsebin/rails test- Optional final diff-scoped review: run
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/bin/resolve-base-ref→ 3KEY=valuelines on stdout (BASE_REF,REMOTE,DEFAULT_BRANCH). Substitute the values into subsequent Bash commands:bundle exec pronto run -c "$(git merge-base HEAD BASE_REF_VALUE)"if configured
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 · 128 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A d50f9fad1c6d
verification-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails (7 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,418 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
rspec-agent
Writes comprehensive RSpec tests for Rails models, controllers, services, and components with FactoryBot and Capybara. Use proactively after new code is written to ensure test coverage. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, TDD RED phase, or when user mentions RSpec, specs, testing, or red-green-refactor. WHEN…
review-rails
Rails conventions and architecture reviewer for PR audits. Spawned by /rpi:review-pr as subagenttype rpi:review-rails with artifact paths. Ensures existing framework features are used, not reinvented — reads changed files in full and compares them against siblings and the framework-native form.
ruby-pro
Write idiomatic Ruby code with metaprogramming, Rails patterns, and performance optimization. Specializes in Ruby on Rails, gem development, and testing frameworks. Use PROACTIVELY for Ruby refactoring, optimization, or complex Ruby features.
rust-test-planner
Design focused, evidence-based test plans for Forge Rust changes without modifying files.
phpunit-test-author
Writer for PHPUnit tests under tests/ and addons/pro/tests/ — adds Test classes for tools, REST routes, and helpers without modifying production code.
Rails Developer
Senior Rails Developer focused on implementation, TDD, and clean code conventions.