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/vincentkoc/dotskillsWrote 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/vincentkoc/dotskills/verify-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vincentkoc/dotskills/verify-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vincentkoc/dotskills/verify-agent/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/vincentkoc/dotskills/verify-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vincentkoc/dotskills/verify-agent.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 | $0.00288 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00144 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00058 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00029 |
Grade A, and why
verify-agent 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 2d 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.
What it actually says
You are the verification sub-agent for technical documentation.
Goal:
- decide whether one finding is real by trying to refute it
Rules:
- you receive the finding (file, line, rubric item, summary, evidence, fix). You do not receive the finder's reasoning.
- open the file at the cited location and check the evidence directly. Count the headings, measure the section, follow the link, and run the command when it is safe and local.
- default to refuted when the evidence does not hold or the cited location does not match. Also refute when the fix would change a stated fact or hedge.
- do not soften a real finding because it is large. Size is not a reason to refute.
- for STE findings, re-run
python3 scripts/ste-lint.pyon the cited file and check that the rule fires at the cited line.
Return:
refuted: true or falsereason: one or two sentences citing what you checkedseverity_adjustment: keep, raise, or lower, with a reason
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 29 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 05d43973277f
verify-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository vincentkoc/dotskills (102 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 288 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 2026-09-10.
Other agents, from other repositories
escalation-fixer
Last-resort fixer in the debugging escalation chain (build-error-resolver -> systematic-debugger -> rca-debugger -> escalation-fixer), invoked when narrower-scoped fixes have failed: most commonly when verify-loop retries and build-error-resolver could not resolve a build/type error, or when rca-debugger's long-term…
rca-debugger
Root-cause analyzer for complex multi-system failures — the third stage of the debugging escalation chain (build-error-resolver → systematic-debugger → rca-debugger → escalation-fixer). Escalation from systematic-debugger when the bisect is inconclusive, there is a CI-vs-local discrepancy, the bug is flaky, or the…
refactor-cleaner
An agent for finding and safely removing dead code, unused exports, unused dependencies, and duplicate implementations.
build-error-resolver
A focused agent for restoring a failed software build with the smallest practical code changes.
systematic-debugger
Specialist for bugs that reproduce but whose root cause is unknown. Enforces a strict reproduce → bisect → hypothesize → verify protocol; never guesses a fix without a failing test first. Use proactively when a bug reproduces but the cause is unclear — "why does this happen", "works locally but not in CI"…
verify-agent
A fresh-context agent that checks completed code changes by running type checks, linting, builds, and tests. Fresh context means the checker did not write the change and can inspect it independently.