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 brcampidelli/chimera-agent --skill verify-before-claiminggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brcampidelli/chimera-agentWrote 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/brcampidelli/chimera-agent/verify-before-claiming)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/brcampidelli/chimera-agent/verify-before-claiming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brcampidelli/chimera-agent/verify-before-claiming/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/brcampidelli/chimera-agent/verify-before-claiming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brcampidelli/chimera-agent/verify-before-claiming.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00582 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00291 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00116 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00058 |
Grade A, and why
verify-before-claiming 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 9d 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 — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Trigger
You are about to say a task is complete. Anything from "fixed the bug" to "updated the config" to "the tests should pass now".
It does not apply when the task was genuinely to explain, review or investigate something. Those finish with an answer, and demanding a diff from them is its own mistake.
Do
- Name the observable that would be different if the work had happened. A file whose contents changed, a command whose exit code flipped, a row that now exists.
- Check that observable. Actually run the command, actually read the file back.
- Report what you saw, including the command and its output — not your expectation of it.
- If nothing observable changed, say that plainly instead of describing the change you intended.
Avoid
Reporting the plan as the outcome. The failure reads like: "I updated the handler to check the token before branching" — fluent, specific, technically accurate about the intent, and describing an edit that was never written to disk.
It is tempting because a convincing explanation feels like evidence. It is not. The explanation is produced by the same process that would produce it whether or not the edit landed, so it carries no information about whether it did.
Also avoid checking something adjacent to the claim: running the full suite proves the suite passes, which is not the same as proving this change did this thing. Pick the check that would have failed before.
Check
The claim and the evidence describe the same event, and the evidence came from the machine.
Concretely: a diff that is non-empty, a test that failed before and passes now, output pasted
rather than paraphrased. If you cannot produce one, the honest report is "I could not verify this",
which is a useful thing to say and takes one sentence.
Risk
Over-applied, this turns a two-line documentation fix into a ceremony, and there are tasks whose result genuinely is prose. The cost of the check should stay well under the cost of being wrong.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 63 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 46f8e4562ac4
verify-before-claiming is a skill published in the GitHub repository brcampidelli/chimera-agent (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 582 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
deepeval
Use when discussing or working with DeepEval (the python AI evaluation framework).
iterative-refinement
Disciplined, measurable iteration for a substantial refinement or investigation: loop against verifiable pass/fail conditions, fan work out to subagents, and keep the main context lean. Use when improving something measurable over repeated cycles (tuning a metric or detector, refactoring against a regression bar)…
verify-changes
Verify code changes by running the project's typecheck, build, lint, and targeted tests, then fix and re-run until clean. Use after editing any source file.
ap-policies
Attach a completion policy gate (shell check or judge-agent rubric) to a session or fan-in group so turn-end only passes when the gate is green, then optionally auto-commit pending human ack. Use when the user says "gate this session on tests passing", "attach a policy", "commit only if tests are green", "judge…
GitHub Issues
Triage GitHub issues, extract the real ask, and connect each issue to the relevant files, tests, or release surface before acting.
Test Driven Development
Drive behavior changes through a failing test, the smallest working implementation, and then cleanup once the behavior is locked.