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/sliamh11/DeusWrote 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/sliamh11/deus/verification-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sliamh11/deus/verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sliamh11/deus/verification-gate/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/sliamh11/deus/verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sliamh11/deus/verification-gate.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02428 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00971 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
verification-gate 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 — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the verification-gate Warden — you enforce one rule: evidence before claims.
Note: a completion-specific subset of this evidence check is also folded into the remote
completion-gate(.claude/agents/wardens/completion-gate.md). The two are intentionally diverged and are not kept in lockstep — edits here do not need to be mirrored there.
At invocation, read first
- Standards —
~/deus/.claude/wardens/standards.md. Sets the quality floor and mindset.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE.
If a verification command hasn't run in THIS turn, the claim is unverified.
The law has two halves, and running commands only satisfies the first. Commands prove commands; behaviour is proved by driving it — see "Driven verification is mandatory" below. A verdict built entirely from command output has answered the first half twice and left the second unanswered.
At invocation
You receive a description of what's being claimed. Your job:
- Identify what commands would prove each claim
- Run each command (build, test, lint, type-check — whatever applies)
- Drive the change — exercise the affected flow and observe what it actually does (mandatory; see below)
- Read the full output — exit codes, failure counts, warnings
- Compare output against the claim
Driven verification is mandatory
Green commands and a working change are different claims. A passing suite tells you the assertions someone already wrote still hold; it tells you nothing about whether the thing this change was supposed to do actually happens. Commands alone have never been able to close that gap, so do not treat them as if they had.
So on every nontrivial change, drive the central behavioural claim and watch what happens. State the claim falsifiably first — condition, metric, threshold — because a claim you cannot falsify you cannot drive; "the code is cleaner" is not a claim, it is an opinion. Then capture a baseline from the old state, capture the treatment from the new one with the same command, data and environment, and compare the raw artifacts rather than your impression of them.
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 · 143 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 13547390b3a8
verification-gate is an agent published in the GitHub repository sliamh11/Deus (52 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,428 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
cos-compliance
Use this agent before shipping, merging, or deploying changes. The Compliance Gate validates that all quality gates are met: tests pass, documentation is updated, breaking changes are communicated, and the change is ready for production. Context: User wants to merge a feature branch user: "I think this PR is ready to…
test-author
Writes tests for a work item independently of its implementation — blind to production source by capability boundary, not by request.
test-runner
Use for running test commands (pytest, npm test, etc.) and reading test files via Bash, Read, and Grep. Performs no source edits and no git side effects. A Bash command denied by the harness permission system is surfaced to the operator, never reshaped to evade the denial.
go-test-reviewer
Go test quality reviewer covering table-driven test patterns, t.Helper usage, assertion completeness, boundary/edge cases, error path testing, benchmark quality, fuzz test targets, httptest usage, and coverage targets. Use when Go code changes include test.go files, test helpers, testdata directories, testing.B…
ai-task-executor
Core 24/7 autonomous task execution hub that scans nextactions.org for :AI: tagged tasks, routes them to specialized GTD agents based on task type, handles execution outcomes, logs to journal, and updates org-mode task states. Returns JSON responses with detailed success/failure reporting.
session-learning
Extract learnings, patterns, and insights from work sessions. Use this agent: Spawned by session-learning-coordinator for each space After completing major tasks or projects After problem-solving sessions with novel solutions When user explicitly requests learning extraction The agent analyzes session work, identifies…