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 skills add AI4Scientist/nano-scientist --skill novelty-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AI4Scientist/nano-scientistWrote 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/skills/ai4scientist/nano-scientist/novelty-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ai4scientist/nano-scientist/novelty-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ai4scientist/nano-scientist/novelty-check/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/skills/ai4scientist/nano-scientist/novelty-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ai4scientist/nano-scientist/novelty-check.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 | $0.00049 | $0.00861 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00430 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00172 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
novelty-check 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 91 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A dc85da9188a0
novelty-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository AI4Scientist/nano-scientist (127 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 861 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
novelty-duplication-advisory
MEMO-ONLY prior-work overlap advisory: surfaces the two ADVISORY taxonomy signals neither a tool nor a model can decide from the paper alone — ADV-TRIVIAL-COMBINATION (standard A+B+C / 缝合 stapling) and ADV-DUPLICATE-PUBLICATION (repackaged / duplicate submission). The executor RETRIEVES candidate prior work (DBLP…
ai-style-impressions
Transparent, itemized impressions of AI-generated WRITING STYLE — the repo's ONLY non-integrity track. Two passes: a deterministic defensive-hedge density screen (tools/checkaistyle.py, AIS-DEFENSIVE-HEDGE) plus a fresh cross-model GROSS-cases-only semantic pass over the 13 AIS- style tells (broken narrative arc, LLM…
baseline-comparison-audit
Audit whether a paper's baseline comparisons are COMPLETE, FAIR, and SIGNIFICANT: a required recent SOTA baseline is missing while 'best/SOTA' is claimed (HP-MISSING-BASELINE); a baseline is undertuned / given less compute-tuning-data, run at a mismatched config, or the equal-budget ablation-as-baseline is absent…
eval-design-forensics
Audit whether a paper's EVALUATION DESIGN actually measures what it claims and whether its reporting is complete — the validity layer family D (experiment-forensics) cannot reach. Three patterns: train/test leakage means the reported score may not measure generalization (HP-EVAL-LEAKAGE — adopts the Kapoor & Narayanan…
experiment-forensics
Audit experiment integrity against the evidence ledger. At L2 (repo + result files present) a fresh cross-model reviewer reads the eval code line-by-line for fake/derived ground truth, score self-normalization, phantom results (a paper number with no backing file/key), dead/uncalled metric code, verified-scope…
proof-derivation-forensics
Family-G proof & derivation integrity forensics: does a THIRD PARTY's written proof/derivation actually establish its theorem, or does it skip an obligation, assume its own conclusion, take an invalid step, drift a symbol's meaning, or smuggle an unstated assumption? Decides from the WRITTEN proof/derivation …