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/ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix/elixir-phoenix-verifynpx skills add ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix --skill elixir-phoenix-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenixWrote 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/ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix/elixir-phoenix-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix/elixir-phoenix-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix/elixir-phoenix-verify.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 | $0.00021 | $0.01247 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00624 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00249 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
elixir-phoenix-verify 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 4d 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.
This is a copy
91% identical to verify — 18 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Loop
Project-aware verification for Elixir/Phoenix. Reads mix.exs and .check.exs to discover tools, test commands, and custom aliases before running anything.
Iron Laws
- Discover before running — Read
mix.exsfirst; never runmix credoif credo isn't a dependency - Prefer ex_check — If
:ex_check+.check.exsexists,mix checkreplaces individual steps - Prefer project aliases — If
mix cior composite alias exists, use it over individual steps - Run in order — Later steps assume earlier ones pass
- Ask before E2E tests — Unit tests run automatically; E2E/integration tests need user confirmation
- NEVER report success without showing actual command output — "should work" is not verification
Step 0: Project Discovery (ALWAYS FIRST)
Read mix.exs — extract deps/0, aliases/0, and cli/0 (for preferred_envs). Also check for .check.exs. See references/project-discovery.md for full patterns.
Discover tools (deps): :credo, :dialyxir, :sobelow, :ex_check, :excoveralls, :boundary
Discover test commands (aliases + deps):
- Unit:
mix test(always), or custom alias likemix test.with_coverage - E2E:
mix playwright.test,mix cypress.run, or similar (checkpreferred_envsforMIX_ENV) - Fast E2E:
mix playwright.run(skips setup — for re-runs)
Discover composite runner: If .check.exs exists, read it — mix check may handle compile, format, credo, test, dialyzer, sobelow, and more.
Report discovery:
Project tools: compile ✓ | format ✓ | credo ✓ | dialyzer ✓ | sobelow ✓ | ex_check ✓
Test commands: mix test (unit) | mix playwright.test (E2E, MIX_ENV=int_test)
Composite runner: mix check (.check.exs covers: compiler, formatter, credo, dialyzer, sobelow, tests)
Strategy: Running `mix check` then asking about E2E
Verification Sequence
CRITICAL: Before using ANY discovered alias or composite command, verify it works:
- Check the dependency is in
mix.lock(not justmix.exs) — deps may not be fetched - Run the command — if it fails with "command not found" or dependency error, fall back to individual steps
- Log the fallback: "mix check failed (ex_check not installed?), falling back to individual steps"
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 117 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 61981086e440
elixir-phoenix-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository ccarvalho-eng/codex-elixir-phoenix (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,247 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 91% identical to verify, differing in 18 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
ash-framework
Use this skill working with Ash Framework or any of its extensions. Always consult this when making any domain changes, features or fixes.
phoenix-framework
Use this skill working with Phoenix Framework. Consult this when working with the web layer, controllers, views, liveviews etc.
writing-review-packets
Create or revise Reviews packet markdown for a code diff, including section strategy, prose, hunk references, validation, and pushing packet revisions with the Reviews CLI. Use when the user asks to write a review packet, organize a diff for review, add prose around hunk refs, update a packet for a new patchset, or…
code-review
Review code changes for regressions, correctness, and missing tests.
using-reviews-locally
Run and use the Reviews app locally, including server startup, port checks, local token setup, CLI config, pushing local reviews or new patchsets, and Codex workflow conventions. Use when the user asks to spin up Reviews, push a local review packet or revision, mint/access local API tokens, debug localhost review…
reviews-overview
Explain the Reviews platform to a general agent: what Reviews provides, when to use it during human-in-the-loop or agent-driven development, how review packets structure a diff for humans, and how Reviews can precede public PR creation or integrate with other review processes. Use when an agent needs to decide whether…