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 byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit --skill confidence-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kitWrote 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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/confidence-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/confidence-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/confidence-check/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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/confidence-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/confidence-check.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 | $0.00043 | $0.01495 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00598 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00299 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00150 |
Grade A, and why
confidence-check 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 89 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Confidence Check — earn the right to start
Trigger phrases: "confidence check", "ready to implement", "before I start", "am I sure enough", "readiness"
When
Right before implementation code gets written for anything beyond a one-line change, and after the scope is clear ([[spec-planning]] / planner). Every other gate in this kit fires at the end — review, DoD, the commit approval. Those catch bad code. None of them catch good code that should never have been written: the duplicate of a helper that already exists, the pattern that fights the project's architecture, the call built against an API that behaves differently than remembered. That waste is invisible to a reviewer, because what they see is a clean diff.
The six checks
Each is answered with evidence, not with a feeling. Name what you ran or read.
| # | Check | How it is actually answered |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Does it already exist? | Grep/Glob the codebase for the behaviour and its likely other names. A near-duplicate counts. |
| 2 | Does it fit this project? | Read CLAUDE.md + the relevant project skill. Same stack, same pattern, no new dependency smuggled in. |
| 3 | Is the external claim verified? | The API / library / config behaviour you are relying on: read the real docs or the installed source. Recalled API shapes are the single most common wrong assumption. |
| 4 | Is there a working reference? | An existing call site in this repo, or a known-good implementation. "It should work like this" is not one. |
| 5 | Is the root cause known? | For a fix: the cause, not the symptom. Unknown → this is a [[systematic-debugging]] task, not an implementation task. |
| 6 | Can it be PROVEN when it is done — with what is running right now? | Name the thing that will show it works — the suite, a migration applied to a real database, a request against a running service — and confirm it is reachable before starting, not after. One command. Measured: an agent spent 44 minutes and 167k tokens producing a migration, then found the database daemon was down and returned unverified. A precondition discovered at the end costs the whole run. |
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 Changed · +2 lines a1c943890147
- 1mo ago First seen · 87 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 3b123eb08240
confidence-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit (24 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 1,495 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
shiplog
Recap of everything shipped since the last run - cross-repo PRs, security fixes, star deltas, and X traction, synthesized into a digest article and a ready-to-post shiplog in your voice.
token-pick
One token recommendation and one prediction market pick - scored, quantified, with a skip branch when signals are weak.
taskmarket-delegate
Delegate work to the TaskMarket agent-worker market - browse open tasks, create tasks with explicit authorization, and track/submit work, so an agent can outsource instead of burning inference on unreliable or low-confidence work.
create-prove
Run a changed Aeon skill for real and attach SHA-bound behavioral evidence to its PR.
case-interview-practice
Interactive consulting case interview practice with structured frameworks, feedback mechanisms, and progressive difficulty. Use when preparing for management consulting interviews, case competitions, or business problem-solving exercises.
agent-flutter-developer
Specialist subagent: Flutter/Dart cross-platform development, Riverpod state management, and platform channels specialist. Use when building Flutter apps, implementing state management, or working with native platform features. Trigger phrases: Flutter, Dart, Riverpod, Bloc, widget, MaterialApp, GoRouter, platform…