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 anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel --skill dos-witness-claimgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernelWrote 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/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel/dos-witness-claim)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel/dos-witness-claim"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel/dos-witness-claim/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/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel/dos-witness-claim"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel/dos-witness-claim.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00047 | $0.03578 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01789 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00716 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00358 |
Grade A, and why
dos-witness-claim 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 — 252 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
dos-witness-claim — fold the witnessed effect, never the narrated one
This is the screenplay for the one move the whole substrate exists to make: when a subagent hands you a result, the result is a claim, not a fact. A claim re-narrating the agent's own work is consistency, not grounding (docs/138). Belief is earned only by a read-back whose byte-author is not the judged agent (a fresh GET, a git existence check, an OS exit code, a state diff). This skill never decides ground truth itself — it shells
dosverbs and reads the verdict. The kernel decides; the skill narrates.
The shape is domain-free: discover the layout → classify the claim type →
witness it on a non-forgeable rung → fold ONLY confirmed. The policy (which
lanes, which plan grammar, where state lives) is data the screenplay reads from
dos doctor --json, never literals it hardcodes.
The seed-2 payoff. This makes the worker's MODEL TIER irrelevant to trust. A weak worker and a strong worker face the SAME witness gate: both have their claimed effect re-read from a surface they did not author. A confident, fluent, frontier-strength narration of a success the world does not corroborate is exactly the silent fail this gate catches (docs/177) — and a weak worker that actually shipped the effect passes it. Distrust is aimed at the byte-author of the evidence, not at the worker's eloquence.
Inputs
- A set of subagent results to fold (return strings + their transcript paths),
e.g. the children of a
parallel()barrier or apipeline()stage. A result is the thing you are tempted to interpolate directly (${result}) — don't. - For each result, the effect it claims (a
(plan, phase), a created file path, a DB row key, a sent-message id). If the worker emitted no checkable effect, that is a real outcome (NO_CLAIM), not a pass — see Step 2.
Step 0 — Discover the workspace layout (one call)
Run the doctor verb and read the result. This is the WCR on-ramp: every path/lane/exit-code below comes from here, never a literal.
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 · 252 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A bfe3bae25f09
dos-witness-claim is a skill published in the GitHub repository anthony-chaudhary/dos-kernel (19 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 3,578 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
fix
Diagnose and fix a bug in an isolated git worktree with reproduce-first, test-first methodology.
codew-release-qa-sweep
Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done: run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets.
verify
Exercise the real app/API/CLI and collect observable evidence; tests alone do not count as end-to-end verification.
eval-workflow
Run evaluation tests against a multi-agent workflow to assess orchestration quality and failure archetype resistance.
genie-orca-review
Independent, read-only review of a group, a wish, or a PR on Orca — SHIP / FIX-FIRST / BLOCKED with severity-tagged findings. Council and retro are this skill with a different input.
verification-before-completion
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always.