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/yonatangross/orchestkitWrote 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/rules/yonatangross/orchestkit/verification-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/yonatangross/orchestkit/verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/yonatangross/orchestkit/verification-gate/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/rules/yonatangross/orchestkit/verification-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/yonatangross/orchestkit/verification-gate.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00349 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00175 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00070 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
verification-gate 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 3d 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
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
Before ANY claim of success, completion, or readiness:
- IDENTIFY the proof command (test suite, linter, build, type check)
- RUN it fresh — previous runs do NOT count
- READ the complete output and exit code
- VERIFY the output actually matches your claim
- ONLY THEN state the claim with cited evidence
Red Flags
If you catch yourself writing any of these, STOP:
- "Should work now" → RUN IT
- "Done!" before running tests → you are NOT done
- "I'm confident that..." → PROVE IT with output
- Expressing satisfaction before verification → RESET
Evidence Format
✅ Tests pass (exit 0, 47/47 green)
✅ Build succeeds (exit 0, 0 warnings)
✅ Types check (exit 0, 0 errors)
Not acceptable:
❌ "Should be fine"
❌ "I believe this works"
❌ "Tests were passing earlier"
Scope
This is the MINIMUM gate every skill must pass. It is NOT a replacement for /ork:verify (full pipeline with parallel agents and grading).
Violating the letter of this rule IS violating the spirit of this rule. No exceptions for time pressure, exhaustion, or user requests to skip.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 47 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A d1058ae0e4ed
verification-gate is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository yonatangross/orchestkit (264 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 349 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 2026-09-09.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
langsmith_evaluation
Comprehensive guide for LangSmith evaluation with @google/genai, including setup, dataset creation, target functions, evaluators, and running evaluations.
unit-test-manners
When implementing unit tests, adhere to the following principles to ensure robust, maintainable, and fast tests.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.