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 asimons81/hardproof --skill designgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/asimons81/hardproofWrote 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/asimons81/hardproof/design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/asimons81/hardproof/design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asimons81/hardproof/design/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/asimons81/hardproof/design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asimons81/hardproof/design.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00284 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00114 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00057 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00028 |
Grade A, and why
design 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Shape the Design
Purpose
Convert verified discovery into a coherent solution whose consequences can be reviewed before product code changes.
When to use
Use for the DESIGN stage selected by the active run context.
Inputs
Use the approved request boundary, discovery artifact, current interfaces, profile requirements, and recorded risks.
Procedure
- State the intended behavior and excluded scope.
- Define public contracts, data ownership, trust boundaries, failure behavior, and rollback implications.
- Compare viable alternatives and choose the smallest reversible option.
- Record consequential choices with
hardproof_recordas decisions. - Write the design artifact with
hardproof_record.
Required records
Standard and Critical runs require a design artifact and a separate human design approval. Model tools cannot create that approval.
Exit criteria
The design is testable, compatible with inspected APIs, explicit about risks, and ready for human review.
Failure modes
Return to DISCOVERY when essential facts are missing. Pause if a safe boundary cannot be designed. Do not weaken gates to fit an attractive approach.
Verification
Cross-check every interface claim and unresolved risk, then ask the human to use /hardproof approve design. After approval exists, call hardproof_transition for PLAN.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 35 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A cf88698077f4
design is a skill published in the GitHub repository asimons81/hardproof (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 284 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
test-harness
Generates pytest test suites with happy path, edge cases, error conditions, fixture scaffolding, mocks, async patterns. Triggers on: "generate tests", "write tests for", "test this function", "create test suite", "pytest for", "unit tests for", "mock strategy for".
repo-readiness-audit
Use when a user asks whether an identified repository is ready for further development, release work, a new feature, handoff, or a new contributor, requiring a disciplined read-only audit before an evidence-backed verdict.
dont-lie-to-me
Use when the user explicitly wants evidence-disciplined answers that separate observed facts, sourced claims, user reports, inference, unknowns, and contradictions before making strong factual or completion claims.
x-analytics-import
Use when X Analytics CSV exports must be inspected, validated, normalized, imported, or compared through a repeatable private-by-default workflow.
x-post-writer
Use when drafting, rewriting, or repurposing short-form X content, including single posts, quote posts, replies, threads, launches, and personal stories, with source fidelity and claim verification built in.
hermes-skill-consolidate
Use when installed Hermes skills must be safely consolidated, restructured, deprecated, split, or given shared references after overlap has been established, with a read-only plan, explicit approval, rollback snapshot, staged writes, and post-change verification.