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 alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook --skill verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbookWrote 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/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook/verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook/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/skills/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook/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 | $0.00067 | $0.00544 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00272 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00109 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00054 |
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 9d 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 — 47 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify
Apply verification in proportion to risk and make uncertainty explicit.
Evidence gate
Run this before factual analysis. Count sources supplied by the user or actually retrieved in this task. If the count is zero, do not assess, compare, correct, or quote facts from pretrained knowledge. Label every claim ⚠️ Unverified — no evidence available, name the exact authoritative retrieval step, report that a verdict is not yet possible, and stop.
References
- Read
references/ai-literacy.mdfor knowledge gaps, sycophancy, and hallucination patterns. - Read
references/regole-distillate.mdfor cross-cutting verification rules.
Procedure
- After passing the evidence gate, classify risk. Use a quick check for reversible internal work and a source-backed check for consequential work.
- Extract substantive claims, especially names, dates, figures, quotes, citations, recent changes, and niche facts.
- Verify each claim against a source that actually supports it. A claim cannot receive ✅ or ❌ without a supplied or retrieved citation. Prefer current primary sources for product, legal, medical, financial, and technical claims.
- Check for sycophancy: neutralize the user's framing, seek counterevidence, and distinguish agreement from support.
- Inspect the process: undeclared assumptions, circular reasoning, missing cases, inconsistent calculations, or skipped acceptance criteria.
- Perform an independent final pass and state what would make the verdict wrong.
Claim labels
- ✅ Verified — directly supported by cited evidence.
- ⚠️ Plausible, not verified — include the exact verification step.
- ❌ Contradicted or fabricated — directly contradicted by cited evidence; provide a supported correction.
Close with an overall verdict and What would make this output wrong?
Boundaries
- Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
- If retrieval tools or supplied sources are unavailable, every factual claim remains ⚠️. Do not provide remembered figures, dates, product history, or corrections; give only the exact authoritative source or retrieval step needed.
- If most claims remain unverified, recommend retrieval from authoritative sources.
- Never treat the model's confidence as evidence.
- Answer in the user's language.
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 47 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 3d0f5153f4c3
verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository alessiomarcone/agent-fieldbook (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 544 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
agent-memory-mcp
A hybrid memory system that provides persistent, searchable knowledge management for AI agents (Architecture, Patterns, Decisions).
create-agent-skills
Expert guidance for creating, writing, building, and refining Claude Code Skills. Use when working with SKILL.md files, authoring new skills, improving existing skills, or understanding skill structure and best practices.
customer-support-expert
Build comprehensive customer support systems including ticketing, knowledge management, SLA tracking, and customer satisfaction analytics. Use when the user mentions helpdesk or service desk, ticketing, SLA targets, knowledge bases, escalation workflows, CSAT/NPS, or customer success operations.
software-in-worten
Übersetzt zwischen Benutzeroberfläche und Text — in beide Richtungen. Aus einer beschriebenen Oberfläche wird ein Skill; aus einem Skill wird eine Oberfläche. Nutzen, wenn eine Anwendung entworfen wird und der Ablauf noch unklar ist, wenn ein bestehendes Werkzeug als Skill verfügbar gemacht werden soll, wenn…
instruction-eval
Change one condition an agent runs under (instruction text, the reference material instructions point at, MCP tools and permissions, hooks, skill files), then run the same prompts before and after, several times each, to see what actually changes. Produces an HTML report showing both arms' answers side by side. Use…
semantic-persona-routing
Erstellt und verwendet einen anbieterneutralen semantischen Routing-Graphen aus Personas, koordinierenden Rollen, Experten und aktiven Skill-Endpunkten. Verwenden, wenn ein LLM eine Anfrage von einer Leitrolle über einen Experten zu einem Skill routen, aus einem vorhandenen Agentensystem einen portablen Persona-Router…