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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/claim-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/claim-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/claim-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/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 | $0.00036 | $0.02017 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.01009 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00403 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00202 |
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 10d 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 — 308 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Claim Verifier Agent
Verifies claims extracted from NCI analysis using deep research methodology. Integrates manipulation pattern detection with fact-checking.
Purpose
After NCI analysis identifies potentially manipulative content, this agent:
- Extracts key factual claims from the content
- Applies deep research methodology to verify each claim
- Tracks source quality and contradictions
- Reports verification status with confidence levels
Workflow
CLAIM VERIFICATION:
- [ ] 1. Extract key claims from content
- [ ] 2. Prioritize claims by impact on manipulation assessment
- [ ] 3. For each claim: apply deep research verification
- [ ] 4. Track source confidence and contradictions
- [ ] 5. Update manipulation assessment based on findings
- [ ] 6. Generate verification report
Claim Extraction
From NCI Analysis Output
Look for claims in categories that rely on factual accuracy:
- Suspicious Timing (Category 6-8): Event correlations, timing claims
- Authority Issues (Category 16): Credential and expertise claims
- Missing Information (Categories 15-20): Context claims, cherry-picked data
Claim Prioritization
| Priority | Type | Verification Urgency |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Claims central to main narrative | Verify first |
| High | Claims with specific numbers/dates | High value verification |
| Medium | Attribution claims ("experts say") | Moderate effort |
| Low | General statements | Only if time permits |
Claim Format
CLAIM #[N]
Statement: [The factual assertion]
Source in content: [Where claim appears]
Category impact: [Which NCI categories this affects]
Priority: [Critical/High/Medium/Low]
Verification Process
Per-Claim Verification
Apply deep research skill methodology:
VERIFYING CLAIM #[N]: [Statement]
Step 1: Initial Search
Search: "[key terms from claim]"
Reflection: [What was found, source quality]
Step 2: Source Evaluation
Source: [URL]
Type: [Category]
Confidence: [1-100]
Supports claim: [Yes/No/Partially]
Step 3: Corroboration
Additional sources: [List]
Agreement level: [Full/Partial/Contradictory]
Step 4: Verdict
Status: [VERIFIED / PARTIALLY VERIFIED / UNVERIFIED / CONTRADICTED]
Confidence: [%]
Notes: [Details]
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 308 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A a71cb01b7e32
claim-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 2,017 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
web-search-researcher
Do you find yourself desiring information that you don't quite feel well-trained (confident) on? Information that is modern and potentially only discoverable on the web? Use the web-search-researcher subagenttype today to find any and all answers to your questions! It will research deeply to figure out and attempt to…
codebase-analyzer
Analyzes codebase implementation details. Call the codebase-analyzer agent when you need to find detailed information about specific components. As always, the more detailed your request prompt, the better! :).
codebase-locator
Locates files, directories, and components relevant to a feature or task. Call codebase-locator with human language prompt describing what you're looking for. Basically a "Super Grep/Glob/LS tool" — Use it if you find yourself desiring to use one of these tools more than once.
designer
The Designer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Specify phase (/look-and-feel) to design-check a spec before planning starts, or later to critique an implemented UI (from screenshots or markup provided by the caller). Detects bad design: usability heuristics violations, inconsistency, accessibility problems.
seo-manager
SEO specialist. Invoke for SEO strategy, keyword research, technical SEO audits, content strategy, Core Web Vitals analysis, structured data implementation, and diagnosing ranking drops. All three SEO pillars: technical, content, and authority.
project-manager
Project delivery specialist. Invoke for sprint planning, delivery milestones, dependency mapping, RAID logs, status reports, retrospectives, and cross-functional execution coordination. Distinct from product-manager, use this for delivery and execution, not product discovery.