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 implementgit 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/implement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/asimons81/hardproof/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asimons81/hardproof/implement/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/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asimons81/hardproof/implement.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 | $0.00305 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00122 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00061 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
implement 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
Implement the Plan
Purpose
Produce the approved behavior in buildable increments while preserving an inspectable task ledger.
When to use
Use for the IMPLEMENT stage selected by the active run context.
Inputs
Use approved design and plan records, ready tasks, project guidance, current code, tests, and profile-specific policy.
Procedure
- Select a dependency-ready task with
hardproof_task. - Add or identify a failing behavioral test where practical.
- Make the smallest complete code and documentation change for that task.
- Run focused checks and inspect the diff.
- Update the task with acceptance notes through
hardproof_task. - Record consequential deviations with
hardproof_record; return to DESIGN or PLAN when approval assumptions no longer hold.
Required records
Keep task status, acceptance evidence, changed scope, and new decisions durable. At least one completed task or recorded change is required before review.
Exit criteria
Planned implementation tasks are complete or explicitly blocked, the repository remains buildable, and the resulting diff is ready for independent challenge.
Failure modes
Stop on unsafe mutation, approval gaps, destructive actions, or design drift. Never mark a task complete without acceptance notes.
Verification
Run task-focused checks, review the actual diff, and call hardproof_transition for REVIEW. Full verification evidence belongs to VERIFY.
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 · 36 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 145a92a7eec1
implement is a skill published in the GitHub repository asimons81/hardproof (6 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 305 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".
ship-workflow
Resumable shipping lifecycle: reconciles current Git and GitHub facts from any entry (dirty default or feature branch, local commits, published branch, open PR, existing manual or native stack, merged work), commits dirty work as lossless logical commits, publishes or reuses the PR, requires current CI and review…
surrogate-verifier
Generates structured test assertions and failure diagnostics for skill packages from a definition and task prompt. Triggers on: "verify this skill", "generate assertions", "surrogate verification", "diagnose skill failure". NOT for code review, use pr-review.
qa-systematic
Systematic web application QA testing with issue taxonomy, health scoring, and regression tracking. Triggers on: "QA this", "test the app", "smoke test", "run QA", "systematic test", "regression test", "full QA", "/qa-systematic".
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.