headcount is an organization of independently installable Claude Code plugins, each grouping skills for a department such as finance, security, or demand generation. Claude Code users install the departments they need and invoke their skills for specialized work; the catalogue entries are skills and related agent tooling from that organization.
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 agentmods add skills/cbrock84/headcount/completion-verificationnpx skills add cbrock84/headcount --skill completion-verificationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcountWrote 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/cbrock84/headcount/completion-verification)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cbrock84/headcount/completion-verification"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cbrock84/headcount/completion-verification.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00073 | $0.00425 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00212 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
completion-verification 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 2d 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
Completion verification
The gap between "should work" and "does work" is where most wasted cycles live. This closes it.
Before claiming done
- Run the real check, not a subset. The command the project gates on, on the current state of the tree.
- Read the output. An exit code of zero with skipped tests, or a build with new warnings, is not what it looks like at a glance.
- Re-read the original request. Not your interpretation of it several steps ago — the actual words. Confirm each part was addressed, and name any part that was not.
- Check for collateral damage. What else consumes what you changed? Did anything else move?
- Confirm nothing was left behind — debug statements, a skipped test, a TODO standing in for the hard case.
What a claim must carry
Say what you ran and what it said. "Tests pass" is an assertion; the command and its output is evidence. If you could not run something, say that explicitly rather than omitting it — an unstated gap reads as a covered one.
Honest incompleteness
Partial work reported accurately is useful. Partial work reported as complete costs someone else the time to discover otherwise, plus the trust. If a part is blocked, unverified, or deliberately skipped, name it in the same breath as the parts that are done.
Never
- Claim a fix works without having reproduced the failure first.
- Report success from a stale run.
- Weaken, skip, or delete a failing test in order to claim green.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 39 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 3310045bae2d
completion-verification is a skill published in the GitHub repository cbrock84/headcount (1,247 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 425 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
save
Save durable decisions, findings, plans, and implementation knowledge from the visible Codex conversation into a new or existing NeatContext context. Use only when the user explicitly invokes this skill or asks to preserve the current conversation as reusable context.
mode
Show or set NeatContext routing to auto, ask, or manual for Codex, with an optional default shared with every other NeatContext host. Use only when the user explicitly invokes this skill or clearly asks to change routing behavior.
status
Report the NeatContext context and routing mode active in Codex, including missing-file or stale-routing warnings. Use when the user asks which context is connected or explicitly invokes this skill.
list
List the local NeatContext Contexts available to Codex. Use when the user asks what contexts exist, what can be connected, or explicitly invokes this skill.
build-oxpecker-web-app
Build or modify an Oxpecker web application in idiomatic F#, using endpoint routing, functional EndpointHandler and EndpointMiddleware composition, ASP.NET Core metadata, and focused endpoint tests.
dns
This skill should be used when the user asks about "DNS", "domain resolution", "GeoDNS / geo routing", "latency-based routing", "weighted / failover routing", "Route 53 / Cloud DNS", an "A/CNAME/ALIAS record", "anycast", or "DNS TTL / propagation". It gives the global front door that maps a name to the right IP and…