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/ffroliva/gflow-cli/live-verifynpx skills add ffroliva/gflow-cli --skill live-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ffroliva/gflow-cliWhat 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 | $0.00100 | $0.02025 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00050 | $0.01012 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00405 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00202 |
Grade A, and why
live-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 3d 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 — 152 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/gflow:live-verify — Live-verification enforcement
gflow-cli reverse-engineers a blackbox: Google Flow. Offline checks (ruff, pyright,
unit/BDD tests) verify gflow-cli's own code does what it's supposed to; they cannot verify
Flow still behaves the way it was captured, because Flow is external and changes without
notice (see #174). This gate enforces two
things, both evidence-based (no claim without a fresh verification artifact — see the
superpowers:verification-before-completion skill):
- Part 1 — Pre-flight, at the start of feature/fix work: confirm the checkout reflects
current
developbefore investing effort. - Part 2 — Live-verify, before claiming done (after
/code-reviewand/ponytail:ponytail-review, before commit/PR): exercise the change against real Flow.
Full design rationale:
docs/superpowers/specs/2026-07-19-live-verify-design.md.
Part 1 — Pre-flight
Run before writing any code for a new feature/fix:
git fetch origin
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD
git rev-list --count HEAD..origin/develop
git log --oneline -5
git rev-list --count HEAD..origin/develop is an asymmetric DAG set-difference — it counts
commits develop has that the current HEAD lacks, regardless of HEAD's own private
unmerged history. This is what catches a genuinely diverged stale branch, not just a
behind-by-fast-forward one.
- If the count is nonzero: stop.
git pull(ondevelop) or rebase/merge (on a feature branch) before continuing. - If the branch's last real commit looks old relative to recent
developactivity (a smell for stale WIP — e.g. missing a function/guard thatdevelopalready has): stop and surface it. Don't silently proceed, don't silently switch — name the divergence and ask the user how to proceed. - A separate sibling checkout is not itself a red flag — this project's workflow
routinely uses sibling checkouts for isolated feature branches, and a real feature branch
is supposed to differ from
develop. The actual signal is "differs fromdevelopin a way that suggests staleness" (missing somethingdevelophas), not "differs by adding new work on top of it." When in doubt, diff the specific file(s) about to be touched againstorigin/develop's version before assuming they match:
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 152 lines · 100 tokens per session scan A faf0af13961a
live-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository ffroliva/gflow-cli (136 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 100 tokens to every session and 2,025 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
smoke-test
End-to-end smoke test skill for DeerFlow. Guides through: 1) Pulling latest code, 2) Docker OR Local installation and deployment (user preference, default to Local if Docker network issues), 3) Service availability verification, 4) Health check, 5) Final test report. Use when the user says "run smoke test", "smoke…
e2e-testing
Guide for running end-to-end tests of the Qwen Code CLI, including headless mode, MCP server testing, and API traffic inspection. Use this skill whenever you need to verify CLI behavior with real model calls, reproduce user-reported bugs end-to-end, test MCP tool integrations, or inspect raw API request/response…
terminal-capture
Automates terminal UI screenshot testing for CLI commands. Applies when reviewing PRs that affect CLI output, testing slash commands (/about, /context, /auth, /export), generating visual documentation, or when 'terminal screenshot', 'CLI test', 'visual test', or 'terminal-capture' is mentioned.
tmux-real-user-testing
This skill should be used when the user asks to "用 tmux 做真实测试", "保存 tmux 日志", "像真实用户一样测试 Qwen", "生成可复查的 TUI 测试报告", "测试 slash command 交互", or requests a tmux-based real user E2E run with complete readable logs. It guides real TUI usage with step-by-step capture-pane snapshots rather than ANSI raw pipe logs.
feat-dev
End-to-end workflow for implementing a non-trivial qwen-code feature. Covers requirements investigation, design, E2E test planning, baseline dry-run, implementation, verification, self-audit, code review, and iteration.
argent-test-ui-flow
Autonomously test an app UI (iOS or Android) by running interact-screenshot-verify loops using argent MCP tools. Use when testing UI flows, verifying login works, testing navigation, running end-to-end UI test scenarios, manual QA steps, visible UI changes, or visual behavior.