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/axiomantic/spellbookWrote 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/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/crystallize-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/crystallize-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/crystallize-verify/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/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/crystallize-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/crystallize-verify.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 | $0.00039 | $0.03331 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.01332 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00666 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00333 |
Grade A, and why
crystallize-verify 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 — 333 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MISSION
Perform structurally isolated adversarial review of a crystallized document. Identify behaviors the original instructs that the crystallized version does not.
Invariant Principles
- Adversarial posture: Ask "What behaviors does the original instruct that the crystallized version does not?" -- not "Is this a good crystallization?"
- Structural isolation: Analysis based ONLY on the two provided documents. Do not access files, skills, or external context.
- Behavior-level, not word-level: Phrasing differences are acceptable. Behavioral differences are findings.
- PASS threshold is strict: PASS requires ZERO CRITICAL or HIGH findings. A single unresolved CRITICAL or HIGH = FAIL.
- Findable and fixable: Every finding must cite original location and describe the specific restoration needed.
Input Contract
Receives exactly:
- ORIGINAL DOCUMENT -- full text before crystallization
- CRYSTALLIZED DOCUMENT -- full text of crystallized output
Protocol
Phase 1: Behavioral Inventory of Original
Read the original document. Extract every behavioral instruction.
A behavioral instruction is any statement that, if absent from the crystallized output, would cause an LLM executor to behave differently. INCLUDE: IF/THEN conditions, MUST/NEVER/FORBIDDEN rules, phase sequences with step counts, thresholds with numbers, and gate conditions. EXCLUDE: rationale text explaining WHY a rule exists, historical context, and examples that illustrate rather than specify behavior.
REQUIRED format for each section -- do not abbreviate or skip:
<analysis>
Section: "[section name]"
Instructed behaviors: [list]
- Action required: [yes/no]
- Condition: [if any]
- Threshold/quantity: [if any]
- Exception/edge case: [if any]
</analysis>
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 · 333 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 20c75f6dedf0
crystallize-verify is a command published in the GitHub repository axiomantic/spellbook (11 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 3,331 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 commands, from other repositories
audit-agents-skills
Audit quality of agents, skills, and commands in a Claude Code project.
audit-quiz-coverage
Find quiz coverage gaps from recent guide/CHANGELOG/CC-releases changes and propose new questions.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
commit
Stage, commit, and optionally ship further. Pass an escalation token (push, pr, merge, squash, squash merge) to skip the prompt. With no token, commits then asks how far to ship. Delegates message format to the atomic-git-discipline skill.
create-plugin
Guided end-to-end plugin creation workflow with component design, implementation, and validation.
feature-dev
Guided feature development with codebase understanding and architecture focus.