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.
npx agentmods add commands/basher83/agent-auditor/verify-claimsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/basher83/agent-auditorWrote 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/basher83/agent-auditor/verify-claims)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/basher83/agent-auditor/verify-claims"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/basher83/agent-auditor/verify-claims.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00011 | $0.01248 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00624 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00250 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
verify-claims 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 4d 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Task: Verify Claims About Code
Document to verify: $ARGUMENTS
Purpose: Verify factual claims in documents about code implementations, features, tests, or PRs.
Core 4 Foundation:
- Context: Document with claims + git repository state
- Model: Semantic verification capabilities
- Prompt: This systematic verification process
- Tools: Git commands, file operations
Instructions
You are verifying claims in the document specified above. Your job is to check facts against source truth, not provide philosophical insights.
Core Principles
- Evidence before claims: Never mark verified without git command output proving it
- Verify behavior, not names: Check what code DOES. Different filenames can provide same functionality.
- Counter-evidence first: Define what would disprove claim BEFORE checking
- Cross-reference patterns: If "X missing Y but Z has Y," check what Y IS in Z first
- No meta-analysis: No recursive patterns, cognitive dynamics, or turtles
Verification Process
For each claim:
- Extract claim: Quote exactly
- Identify verification need: What file/code would prove/disprove?
- Define counter-evidence: "This claim would be FALSE if I found [specific evidence]"
- Focus on FUNCTIONALITY not filenames
- Cross-reference if comparing: Check what feature IS in reference first
- Run verification: Use git show/diff/grep
- Show evidence: Paste relevant output
- State verdict: ✅ Verified / ❌ Incorrect / ⚠️ Partially true
- Move to next claim: No commentary, just next verification
Example: The Naming vs Functionality Pattern
Claim: "PR #7 missing Jina Reader direct API variation"
What this means: PR #7 lacks script making direct HTTP calls to r.jina.ai (not using MCP)
Counter-evidence: ANY script in PR #7 that:
- Uses httpx/requests (not MCP dependencies)
- Calls https://r.jina.ai/
- Downloads docs directly
Commands:
# Check what files exist
git diff --name-only main...feature-branch
# Check dependencies
git show feature-branch:path/to/script.py | head -20
# Check for API calls
git show feature-branch:path/to/script.py | grep "r.jina.ai"
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 204 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 316c9b9169d3
verify-claims is a command published in the GitHub repository basher83/agent-auditor (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 1,248 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.