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 boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill --skill doublecheckgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boshi-xixixi/TraeSkillWrote 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/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/doublecheck)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/doublecheck"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/doublecheck/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/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/doublecheck"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/doublecheck.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, 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 30 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.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 31 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 | $0.00049 | $0.03232 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01616 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00646 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00323 |
Grade A, and why
doublecheck 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 7d 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 — 278 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Doublecheck
Run a three-layer verification pipeline on AI-generated output. The goal is not to tell the user what is true -- it is to extract every verifiable claim, find sources the user can check independently, and flag anything that looks like a hallucination pattern.
Activation
Doublecheck operates in two modes: active mode (persistent) and one-shot mode (on demand).
Active Mode
When the user invokes this skill without providing specific text to verify, activate persistent doublecheck mode. Respond with:
Doublecheck is now active. I'll verify factual claims in my responses before presenting them. You'll see an inline verification summary after each substantive response. Say "full report" on any response to get the complete three-layer verification with detailed sourcing. Turn it off anytime by saying "turn off doublecheck."
Then follow ALL of the rules below for the remainder of the conversation:
Rule: Classify every response before sending it.
Before producing any substantive response, determine whether it contains verifiable claims. Classify the response:
| Response type | Contains verifiable claims? | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Factual analysis, legal guidance, regulatory interpretation, compliance guidance, or content with case citations or statutory references | Yes -- high density | Run full verification report (see high-stakes content rule below) |
| Summary of a document, research, or data | Yes -- moderate density | Run inline verification on key claims |
| Code generation, creative writing, brainstorming | Rarely | Skip verification; note that doublecheck mode doesn't apply to this type of content |
| Casual conversation, clarifying questions, status updates | No | Skip verification silently |
Rule: Inline verification for active mode.
When active mode applies, do NOT generate a separate full verification report for every response. Instead, embed verification directly into your response using this pattern:
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 278 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A ea16d7eb9d14
doublecheck is a skill published in the GitHub repository boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill (263 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 3,232 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
<skill-name>
A template for defining a coding-agent skill, including its title, trigger situations, overview, workflow, common mistakes, and optional references.
spec-writing
A method for writing a software specification: a document that records decisions, reasons, boundaries, and ways to judge whether implementation succeeded. It first checks whether important unknowns require user clarification or technical research.
onboarding-unknown-codebase
A method for quickly understanding an unfamiliar codebase, meaning a software project whose structure and behavior you do not yet know. It builds a project map by examining overview files, directories, and one main execution path.
commit-message
A guide for writing clear, traceable Git commit messages using the Conventional Commits format, which labels changes such as features, bug fixes, documentation, and refactoring.
clarifying-questions
Guidance for clarifying vague or assumption-heavy requests before making changes.
debugging
A systematic method for finding the underlying cause of a software bug by observing the failure, forming a hypothesis, and testing it.