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 felipesauer/mnema --skill claim-checkinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/felipesauer/mnemaWrote 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/felipesauer/mnema/claim-checking)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/felipesauer/mnema/claim-checking"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/felipesauer/mnema/claim-checking/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/felipesauer/mnema/claim-checking"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/felipesauer/mnema/claim-checking.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00323 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00129 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00065 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00032 |
Grade A, and why
claim-checking 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.
What it actually says
Claim checking
A search that finds nothing proves only that this search found nothing.
Before you say "there is none"
- Search by the identifier, not by a phrase around it. Try the spellings the language allows: the plain name, the quoted name, the name inside a string, the name built by concatenation.
- Read the whole output. Do not cut it with
heador limit the depth of the search; what you did not read is not evidence either way. - Check what the search could not see: ignored or generated folders, files outside the repository, configuration, tests, and other languages in the same tree.
- Count. If the number of matches surprises you, open one of them.
Before you say "this is the only place"
Every caller, not the first caller: search for the name, then for each alias and re-export of it. A rule that lives in N places has N places, and the one you did not find is usually the N+1th.
How to report
Write the claim, the search that supports it, and the limit of that search, in that order.
"No other caller found by searching parseConfig in src/ and tests/; generated code and
scripts/ were not searched."
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 · 31 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 105e26d8e5df
claim-checking is a skill published in the GitHub repository felipesauer/mnema (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 323 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-10-10.
Other skills, from other repositories
doubt-driven-development
Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when you want every assumption cross-examined before proceeding, when stress-testing a plan for hidden failure modes, when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high…
systemic-issue-triage
Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.
issue-root-resolution
Trigger: root audit, atacar la raíz, issue roots, backlog roots, mechanism map, deletion-driven fix, resolver issues de raíz, close outdated issues. Audit and resolve issue clusters by verified root cause.
rdd-defect-workflow
Trigger: RDD, receipt-driven development, review authority, receipt/lineage, correction/recovery, delivery gate/kill switch, bounded review defects. Guide work.
project-check
Existing project health scan — audits Infrastructure, Security, Quality, and Harness setup. Read-only. Use when: '/project-check', 'project health check', 'project audit', 'what\'s missing', 'analyze my project', 'check setup'. Ends with /project-init and /setup recommendations. NOT for new projects (use…
full-audit
Exhaustive, denominator-driven audit of an entire area (codebase, docs, memory, skills, DB, config). Runs a 6-phase pipeline: scope agreement + prior-map diff -> deterministic sweep (counts/versions/paths/parsing plus cross-index reconciliation) -> parallel read-only content review (citations forced, rule dry-run) ->…