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 agentmods add skills/andyzengmath/quantum-loop/ql-verifynpx skills add andyzengmath/quantum-loop --skill ql-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/andyzengmath/quantum-loopWhat 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 | $0.00074 | $0.02187 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.01094 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00437 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00219 |
Grade A, and why
ql-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 2d 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 — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quantum-Loop: Verify
Inline-vs-adversarial review split (P5.A7 / US-007)
The verify gate distinguishes routine checks (deterministic verdict, exit-code 0/non-0) from adversarial checks (require judgement) and routes them differently:
| Check kind | Examples | Mode | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Routine | typecheck, lint, full test suite, file-org conventions | inline-only in implementer prompt before STORY_PASSED | Verdict is deterministic; subagent round-trip adds 25min for zero signal value |
| Adversarial | cross-story file conflicts, intent drift vs PRD, security review, architecture / API-shape | subagent dispatch (spec-reviewer, quality-reviewer, security-reviewer, architect) | Requires judgement, context, and human-readable explanation that grep cannot provide |
Routine checks emit literal tokens the orchestrator greps for evidence:
[INLINE-REVIEW] typecheck OK[INLINE-REVIEW] lint OK[INLINE-REVIEW] all assigned tests pass[INLINE-REVIEW] file-org follows project conventions
If a routine check fails, the implementer marks the story failed and EXITS — does NOT signal STORY_PASSED. Adversarial review is reserved for cases the inline gate cannot adjudicate. Per Superpowers v5.0.6: 25min -> 30s on the routine path; total throughput improves 10-50x at the same quality bar.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE.
This is not a guideline. This is not a best practice. This is a law. There are zero exceptions.
The 5-Step Gate Function
Every claim that something "works", "passes", or "is done" must pass through these 5 steps:
Step 1: IDENTIFY
What command or check proves the claim?
Examples:
- "Tests pass" →
npm testorpytest - "Build succeeds" →
npm run buildortsc --noEmit - "Lint clean" →
eslint .orruff check - "Feature works" → specific test command + manual check
- "Bug is fixed" → test that reproduces the original bug
Step 2: RUN
Execute the complete command. Right now. Fresh. Not from memory or cache.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 176 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 1695509e5c36
ql-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository andyzengmath/quantum-loop (24 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 2,187 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
vastai-sdk
Vast.ai Python SDK — high-level API for GPU instances, volumes, serverless endpoints, and billing.
token-optimizer
Audit a Claude Code or Codex setup for context-window waste, then fix it and measure the savings. Use when context feels tight.
token-coach
Plan a token-efficient Claude Code or Codex setup, or get a quick health check. Coaching, not the full audit (use token-optimizer for that).
fleet-auditor
Cross-system agent token/cost audit (Claude Code, Codex, OpenClaw, Hermes, OpenCode): idle burns, model misrouting, config bloat, with dollar savings.
gdpr-compliance-checker
Autonomous GDPR compliance auditor that scans a codebase to identify PII collection, storage, and sharing, then produces an article-by-article gap analysis, a pre-filled Data Processing Agreement (DPA), and a ROPA (Record of Processing Activities) starter kit — all exported as downloadable files (.docx recommended).…
pii-detector
Proactive PII add-on — augments the main response with PII guidance. Auto-trigger on any form, schema, migration, model, API route, GraphQL resolver, auth flow, or data design discussion. Also fires on: middleware, webhooks, workers, seed/fixture/factory files, delete/export/purge/anonymize functions, cron jobs, HTTP…