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/niels-emmer/myaceWrote 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/niels-emmer/myace/verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/niels-emmer/myace/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/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/niels-emmer/myace/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/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 | $0.00040 | $0.00439 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00176 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00088 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00044 |
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 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.
What it actually says
- Run
plan/validate, format/lint, and policy-as-code checks and confirm an actual pass — quote the real output, don't summarize a run you didn't just do. - Read the plan output and confirm it matches the intended change — no resources created or destroyed that the task didn't ask for.
- Confirm the change added or updated tests that cover it (pipeline unit tests, deployment integration/smoke tests), checked against the
test-patternsskill's checklist — not just that some test somewhere still passes. - Run the linter and type checker; both must be clean. A warning that's routinely ignored project-wide is a judgment call to note explicitly, not to silently pass over.
- If the change touches identity, secrets, network exposure, data, images, or dependencies, run it through the
devsecops-checklistskill and resolve every FAIL before continuing — don't defer a blocking finding to "a follow-up." - If the change includes a state migration or a change to a shared/critical path, confirm the rollback path has actually been exercised, not just written.
- Confirm documentation and runbooks — README, AGENTS.md-style rule files, inline comments describing now-stale behavior — have been updated to match the change, in this same change set.
- Append the decision-log entry per the
memory-systemskill: what was decided, how it was tested (point at the specific runs from steps 1-4), and which docs were touched. - Only report the change as done once every applicable step above is actually true — not once the code compiles, and not once "most of it" is finished.
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 · 15 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 653e6b999063
verify is a command published in the GitHub repository niels-emmer/myace (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 439 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
fix-pipeline
Apply fixes to a broken CI/CD pipeline configuration.
nyann:wait-for-pr-checks
Poll a GitHub PR's checks until they all pass, any one fails, or a timeout is hit. Returns a structured outcome the caller can gate on.
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.