Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to amikai/openings-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/amikai/openings-mcp/main/.agents/skills/verify-companies/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/amikai/openings-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/skills/amikai/openings-mcp/verify-companies)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/amikai/openings-mcp/verify-companies"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amikai/openings-mcp/verify-companies/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/amikai/openings-mcp/verify-companies"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amikai/openings-mcp/verify-companies.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 100 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00051 | $0.01324 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00662 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
verify-companies 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 12d 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Companies
Overview
cmd/verify-companies sweeps every curated companies.yaml entry
through the real internal/ats adapter path — the same code the MCP server serves —
and reports each entry as OK with its total job count, or ERROR with the
error message. Each successful search is followed by one Detail probe on
a sampled job. Two workflows build on it: audit (find and prune
stale roster entries) and promotion (move unverified/<provider>.yaml
candidates into the curated roster).
The sweep
go run ./cmd/verify-companies [--provider ashby,greenhouse,lever,workday] \
[--format text|json] [--concurrency N] [--timeout D]
- Any Search failure is ERROR — a stale identifier's 404 and a transient timeout or 5xx look the same at the status level; the detail column tells them apart.
- DETAIL_ERROR means the search succeeded but the Detail probe on a sampled job failed — usually a detail-template divergence in the adapter (issue #196's shape), not a stale roster entry. The fix is adapter code, not the roster.
zero-jobin the summary is informational: board live, no current openings. Not a failure. Zero-job boards get no Detail probe.- Keep the default 300s
--timeout: the largest full-dump boards (e.g. Palantir, Veeva on lever) take minutes to download, and 60s produced false ERRORs. - Recruitee is auto-capped at 2 concurrent workers inside
verify-companies(even when--concurrencyis higher): its public API rate-limits hard (HTTP 429) around the default pool size. - Exits non-zero on any ERROR or DETAIL_ERROR, so it doubles as a CI check.
Audit workflow
- Sweep, scoped with
--providerwhen you already know the target;--format jsonwhen you'll process the results. - Re-run the failures once before touching the roster — transient timeouts and 5xx clear on retry; stale identifiers (404, unknown board) don't. Read the detail column, don't just count statuses.
- For each confirmed-stale ERROR and each OK entry with 10 or fewer
jobs, web-search the company's current careers page
(
<company> careers) — a dead or near-empty board is often a leftover after the company moved to another ATS. Then, by what the careers URL shows (adapter host shapes:careersHostPatternsByAdapter,internal/ats/registry.go):- Another supported adapter's host → the company migrated. Move the
entry to that provider's
companies.yaml, slug taken from the URL, and verify with--provider <new>. - Same provider, different slug → fix the slug.
- Same provider, same slug → small company; leave it.
- No working careers page or unsupported ATS → remove the entry. If
only the display name is in doubt, move it to
unverified/<provider>.yaml.
- Another supported adapter's host → the company migrated. Move the
entry to that provider's
go test ./...— registry tests catch roster mistakes.- Commit per the
roster:convention in AGENTS.md.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 108 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A a6519c7218ef
verify-companies is a skill published in the GitHub repository amikai/openings-mcp (92 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,324 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
adeu-redlining
Use this skill when reviewing, editing, redlining, or negotiating an existing Microsoft Word document (.docx) — including proposing edits as tracked changes, accepting or rejecting existing tracked changes, replying to comments, comparing two versions, sanitizing author metadata, or finalizing a contract for…
wiki
Rebuild a flow-first project wiki using the mimirs wiki MCP tool. Use when the user asks to generate, rebuild, refresh, or write the wiki for a codebase.
plan
Design an implementation plan before writing code — where the change lands, what it will touch, what could break, and the steps in order. Use when asked to plan a feature, scope a change, or figure out how to approach an edit before making it. To assess a change that already exists (a diff, refactor, or rename), use…
research
Answer a hard, open-ended question about how the project works or is built by synthesizing every source — code, structure, git history, prior decisions, discussion, caveats — and verifying each claim against the source. Use for deep cross-cutting questions that span more than one area. Narrower siblings — a single…
scout
Research the web for solutions, competitors, alternatives, or prior art for a decision facing this project — then store the findings in project memory so they survive the session. Use when choosing a library or approach, comparing tools, checking what others do, or evaluating whether to build vs adopt.
explore
Build an accurate mental model of an unfamiliar codebase, feature, or area before changing it — where it lives, how it connects, what it does, and why. Use when asked how something works, where something is, when onboarding to a repo, or before editing code you don't know. For a cross-cutting question that needs…