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/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amritWrote 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/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/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/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit/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 | $0.00013 | $0.01236 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00618 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00247 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00124 |
Grade A, and why
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 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 — 189 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/verify — Implementation Verification
Validate that built features work correctly, meet acceptance criteria, and haven't introduced regressions.
Prerequisites
- Implementation should be complete (run
/executefirst) .planning/plans/should contain the relevant plan.planning/STATE.mdshould show completed tasks
Instructions
Step 1: Determine Scope
From $ARGUMENTS:
- If plan name given: Verify that specific plan
- If phase number given: Verify all plans in that phase
- If nothing: Verify the most recently executed plan from
.planning/STATE.md
Step 2: Automated Verification Suite
Run ALL automated checks:
echo "=== 1. BUILD CHECK ==="
npm run build 2>&1
echo "=== 2. TYPE CHECK ==="
npx tsc --noEmit 2>&1
echo "=== 3. TEST SUITE ==="
npm test 2>&1
echo "=== 4. LINT CHECK ==="
npm run lint 2>&1
echo "=== 5. SECURITY AUDIT ==="
npm audit --production 2>&1 | head -20
Record results in a table:
| Check | Status | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Build | ✅/❌ | [summary] |
| Types | ✅/❌ | [errors if any] |
| Tests | ✅/❌ | [X passing, Y failing] |
| Lint | ✅/❌ | [errors if any] |
| Security | ✅/❌ | [vulnerabilities if any] |
Step 3: Plan Compliance Check
Read the plan from .planning/plans/. For EACH task:
- Verify file existence — All files listed in the task exist
- Verify implementation — Read the files, confirm the implementation matches the task
- Check definition of done — Verify each acceptance criterion
- Check for shortcuts — Look for TODOs, placeholder code, hardcoded values
### Task [N]: [Title]
- **Files exist:** ✅/❌
- **Implementation complete:** ✅/❌ [notes]
- **Acceptance criteria:**
- [x] Criterion 1 — [evidence]
- [ ] Criterion 2 — MISSING: [what's missing]
- **Code quality:** ✅/❌ [notes]
- **Verdict:** PASS / FAIL / PARTIAL
Step 4: Integration Verification
Beyond individual tasks, verify the pieces work together:
- Data flow — Does data flow correctly from input to storage to output?
- Error propagation — Do errors cascade correctly without silent failures?
- Edge cases — Test boundary conditions, empty inputs, max values
- Concurrent access — If applicable, verify race conditions are handled
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 · 189 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A afaf7caa9de7
verify is a command published in the GitHub repository boparaiamrit/skills-by-amrit (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,236 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
prototype
You are building a proof-of-concept for the current Grainulator sprint. Read CLAUDE.md for sprint context and claims.json for existing research claims.
verify
Run repository verification using the verification-loop skill.
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
test-coverage
Analyze test coverage and identify the highest-value gaps to fill.
tdd
A command that follows test-driven development (TDD), a method where you write tests before the code they check. It moves through writing a failing test, adding the smallest implementation, and then improving the code.
check-dev
Type-check a Z specification with fuzz.