Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to g-digital-by-Garrigues/GoCertius_MCP. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/g-digital-by-Garrigues/GoCertius_MCP/main/.claude/commands/evidence-lifecycle.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/g-digital-by-Garrigues/GoCertius_MCPWrote 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/g-digital-by-garrigues/gocertius_mcp/evidence-lifecycle)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/g-digital-by-garrigues/gocertius_mcp/evidence-lifecycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/g-digital-by-garrigues/gocertius_mcp/evidence-lifecycle/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/g-digital-by-garrigues/gocertius_mcp/evidence-lifecycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/g-digital-by-garrigues/gocertius_mcp/evidence-lifecycle.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01373 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00687 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00275 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00137 |
Grade A, and why
evidence-lifecycle 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 11d 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 — 97 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Evidence Lifecycle
Create and certify evidence in GoCertius. Evidence is always grouped: you create a group, add N evidences to it, then seal the group. Sealing is mandatory — an unsealed group stays in "capturing" state and is never certified.
Hierarchy
Case File
└─ Evidence Group (container; sealed once = certified)
└─ Evidence (one file per evidence item)
Required inputs
case_file_id— UUID of the target case file (callsession_info→case_file_listif unknown)use_case_id— UUID of the use case; reuse the one from an existing case file in the same account- One or more files to certify: for each file you need its
fileName, a humantitle, and the SHA-256 hash of the file content
Flow
-
Locate or create a case file
session_info→ getuserIdcase_file_listwithuserIdto find an existing case file- Or
case_file_createif none exists (requiresidUUID,name,description,useCaseId)
-
Create an evidence group
evidence_group_createwith a generated UUIDid,name,evidenceType: "FILE", andcaseFileId- Note the group UUID — needed for every evidence and the final seal
-
Add evidence items (one call per file)
Choose custody type based on who stores the file:
EXTERNAL — you hold the file, GoCertius records the hash as proof of existence:
evidence_createwithcustodyType: "EXTERNAL",id,title,fileName,hash(SHA-256 hex, 64 chars),evidenceGroupId,caseFileId- The API may return a network error even when the evidence was persisted — verify with
evidence_listif in doubt
INTERNAL — GoCertius stores the file in S3, allowing the platform to verify the hash directly:
- Easiest path —
evidence_upload: pass the local file (filePathin stdio mode, orcontentBase64) pluscaseFileId,evidenceGroupId,title,fileName. It computes the SHA-256, registers the evidence, and uploads the bytes in one call — no manual hashing or PUT. Use this when the file is on the local machine. - Manual path —
evidence_createwithcustodyType: "INTERNAL", same fields plushash: - Response contains
{ uploadFileUrl, expiration }— a pre-signed S3 URL (valid ~10 min) - Upload the file:
PUT <uploadFileUrl>with headers:Content-Type: <mime-type>x-amz-checksum-sha256: <sha256-base64>(SHA-256 of the file content, base64-encoded, not hex)
- A 200 from S3 confirms the upload; GoCertius processes it asynchronously
- Or pass
fileUrl(public HTTPS, no redirect, <1 GiB) toevidence_createto have it download+upload automatically - Computing the base64 checksum:
openssl dgst -sha256 -binary <file> | base64
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 97 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e4e770c232c8
evidence-lifecycle is a command published in the GitHub repository g-digital-by-Garrigues/GoCertius_MCP (0 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,373 tokens. 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
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
voice-compliance
Voice/telephony compliance check — invokes voice-ai-reviewer to produce TM-voice-{slug}.md with TCPA, STIR/SHAKEN, state recording-consent, EU AI Act Art. 50, and synth-voice deepfake-law gaps.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
at-dsgvo
You are helping an enterprise architect generate an Austrian Data Protection Assessment — the Austrian-specific GDPR layer applied by the Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) under the Datenschutzgesetz (DSG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 as amended). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add Austrian obligations that go beyond the EU…
au-pspf
You are an enterprise architect generating a Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) compliance assessment for an Australian Government entity or contractor handling government information.