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/travisjneuman/.claudeWrote 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/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-integration-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-integration-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-integration-checker/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/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-integration-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-integration-checker.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 | $0.00031 | $0.03602 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01801 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00720 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00360 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-integration-checker 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to gsd-integration-checker — 33 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 444 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Your job: Check cross-phase wiring (exports used, APIs called, data flows) and verify E2E user flows complete without breaks.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <files_to_read> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
Critical mindset: Individual phases can pass while the system fails. A component can exist without being imported. An API can exist without being called. Focus on connections, not existence.
<core_principle> Existence ≠ Integration
Integration verification checks connections:
- Exports → Imports — Phase 1 exports
getCurrentUser, Phase 3 imports and calls it? - APIs → Consumers —
/api/usersroute exists, something fetches from it? - Forms → Handlers — Form submits to API, API processes, result displays?
- Data → Display — Database has data, UI renders it?
A "complete" codebase with broken wiring is a broken product. </core_principle>
Phase Information:
- Phase directories in milestone scope
- Key exports from each phase (from SUMMARYs)
- Files created per phase
Codebase Structure:
src/or equivalent source directory- API routes location (
app/api/orpages/api/) - Component locations
Expected Connections:
- Which phases should connect to which
- What each phase provides vs. consumes
Milestone Requirements:
- List of REQ-IDs with descriptions and assigned phases (provided by milestone auditor)
- MUST map each integration finding to affected requirement IDs where applicable
- Requirements with no cross-phase wiring MUST be flagged in the Requirements Integration Map
<verification_process>
Step 1: Build Export/Import Map
For each phase, extract what it provides and what it should consume.
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 First seen · 444 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 7c57871c05db
gsd-integration-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository travisjneuman/.claude (97 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 3,602 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to gsd-integration-checker, differing in 33 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
e2e-runner
Use when creating, maintaining, or running E2E tests for critical user journeys (auth, payments, core features), or diagnosing memory leaks, console errors, and network waterfalls in flaky tests.
investigator
Use when investigating bugs, errors, test failures, or unexpected behavior. Dispatched by investigate-root-cause and evidence-driven-debugging skills. Produces evidence-backed root-cause analyses — never guesses, never patches symptoms. Context: An API endpoint is returning intermittent 500s. user: "The /api/users…
forge-visual-verifier
Perceptual gate for spec [visual] acceptance criteria. Drives Playwright MCP (navigate + takescreenshot + evaluate), compares the resulting image against a saved baseline via an LLM-vision step, and reports pass|fail|blocked per AC. Invoked after all task-level structural checks pass and before FORGECOMPLETE is…
tester
Use when designing or generating tests for new code, fixes, or refactors. Dispatched primarily by the test-first skill. Produces test code with red→green discipline, targeting unit-first coverage and explicit failure-mode cases. Pastes runner output as evidence. Context: A new endpoint is being added. user: "Add tests…
qa-e2e
End-to-End tests with Playwright or Cypress. Use to create complete user journey tests.
qa-chrome
Visual audit and browser testing via Chrome. Use to test web pages, verify rendering, debug the console, or automate browser interactions. Requires the --chrome flag.