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/easyinplay/harnessed/paranoidnpx skills add easyinplay/harnessed --skill paranoidgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/easyinplay/harnessedWrote 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/easyinplay/harnessed/paranoid)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/easyinplay/harnessed/paranoid"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/easyinplay/harnessed/paranoid.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 | $0.00131 | $0.01442 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00066 | $0.00721 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00288 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00144 |
Grade A, and why
verify-paranoid 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 6d 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
verify-paranoid workflow (v3)
Overview
1-phase sub-workflow mapping CLAUDE.md "gstack 治理关卡 🔒 关键模块 PR 前强制 — /review"
onto harnessed runtime (Phase v3.0-3.4 W0.12 — D-04 Stage ④ Verify 7 sub + D-12 gstack
治理关卡 + Pattern A sub-workflow ship)。
| phase | id | upstream | model | capability | gate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-review |
gstack | opus | {{ capabilities.gstack-review.cmd }} |
judgments.stage-routing.verify-paranoid-critical.fires |
Per-phase config loads from workflows/verify/paranoid/workflow.yaml; engine 4-level gate
resolver evaluates phase.is_critical_module == true via expr-eval — true 则 invoke gstack
/review, false 则 skip (chain_isolation 3 铁律 R20.16 sister verify-work v2 phase 04)。
Capability refs
Sister workflows/capabilities.yaml entries:
gstack-review— Bucket 3 治理关卡 (impl: gstack, cmd: /review, fires_when: phase.is_critical_module == true)
Gate ref
Sister workflows/judgments/stage-routing.yaml:
verify-paranoid-critical.fires—phase.stage == 'verify' and phase.is_critical_module == true(默认 critical fire only; 普通 PR 应跳过 — gstack-review 是 Paranoid Staff Engineer 重武器)
Routing rules (sister CLAUDE.md "gstack 治理关卡")
- ✅ 触发: 关键模块 PR 前 (auth / payment / data migration / core algorithm 等)
- ❌ 跳过: 常规 PR / docs / config / 非核心 module
How to invoke
!harnessed checkpoint intent verify-paranoid
The banner above (when present) means this invocation is REGISTERED with the engine (an intent marker) — not yet compliant: the steps below (prompt → spawn → checkpoint complete) resolve it, and a per-turn
<workflow-intent>reminder persists until they run.
The numbered sequence below is the state machine — execute it with Bash. Do NOT improvise an equivalent flow from the Overview above: freelancing bypasses the engine (no ledger, no evidence guard). harnessed gives you the spawn-ready prompt; YOU spawn the subagent with a CC-native Task / Agent tool (keeps the session responsive + lets clarification round-trips reach the user).
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 86 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A 931fa6f89812
verify-paranoid is a skill published in the GitHub repository easyinplay/harnessed (2 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 1,442 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
gemini
Cross-model second opinion from Google Gemini — a different AI reviewing the same changes, with deep Google ecosystem knowledge. Three modes: review (pass/fail gate for Google Ads campaigns, SEO metadata, or code), challenge (adversarial stress-test that tries to break your changes), and consult (open Q&A with Gemini…
audit
Project health audit and health check — architecture, performance, tests, dependencies, code quality. Use when assessing overall project health, before releases, or after refactors.
boundaries
Analyze Phoenix context boundaries and module coupling via mix xref. Use when checking cross-context calls, validating dependencies, before splitting modules, or reviewing architecture.
triage
Triage review findings interactively — approve, skip, or prioritize each issue. Use after /phx:review to filter findings before fixing.
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.
security-architecture-review
Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it. Use this to review an architecture or pull request for security, set secure coding standards, choose or tune SAST and DAST tooling, assess a…