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 frenzymath/Danus --skill verify-proofgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/frenzymath/DanusWrote 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/frenzymath/danus/verify-proof)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/frenzymath/danus/verify-proof"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/frenzymath/danus/verify-proof/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/frenzymath/danus/verify-proof"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/frenzymath/danus/verify-proof.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00060 | $0.01326 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00530 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00133 |
Grade A, and why
verify-proof 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 1mo 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 — 103 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Proof
The verifier is the canonical and sole authority on mathematical correctness. Mathematics requires 100% accuracy; even though this verifier is not a formal proof assistant, it is the strongest correctness check in the system. No LLM consultation, panel, or self-critique substitutes for it.
You verify and write a fact through one tool: fact_submit. It runs the
glossary-coverage check, calls the verifier, and writes the fact to the fact graph
iff the verifier accepts — there is no other way a fact enters the graph.
When to submit
- The full target theorem — when you have assembled a complete proof of the
whole problem (as a self-contained statement + proof, citing its predecessors by
fact_id). - Every intermediate result you intend to USE downstream — a lemma, a candidate construction, an arithmetic/closed-form claim, a saturation or local-to-global claim, any sharply-delimited step. Adopting an unverified partial result as a building block is the single biggest correctness risk. When in doubt, submit.
Choose a substantive mathematical boundary, not the smallest checkable line. Routine calculations, substitutions, and bookkeeping identities should normally remain internal steps in the proof of a deeper fact. The submitted fact should state one mathematically significant conclusion; depth must not be simulated by bundling several shallow or unrelated claims. Split supporting claims only when they have independent downstream uses, separate proof obligations, or need isolated verifier repair.
Do not build on an unverified finding from global memory. A conclusion /
example / counterexample there is awareness, not a brick — re-derive it as a
self-contained statement+proof and submit it before relying on it.
Before you submit — write an "ugly-proof" fact
A fact in the fact graph is written in "ugly-but-rigorous" form (the operator may call it an "ugly-proof"). The one goal of this form is that the fact is mechanically checkable for correctness by a reader with no memory and no math intuition (an agent with no recall, a human, the verifier). It is allowed — encouraged — to be ugly: redundant, machine-flavored, verbose. It is not allowed to be ambiguous, vague, or context-dependent. "Ugly" is the deliberate contrast with the polished arXiv paper (a separate pipeline); here, only mechanical correctness matters.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 103 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 9ce9ebc7983e
verify-proof is a skill published in the GitHub repository frenzymath/Danus (483 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 1,326 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
personal-genomics
Analyse personal DNA / genome files for pharmacogenomics, disease risk, carrier status, ancestry and traits. Use whenever the user mentions DNA or genome analysis, a raw genome file, gene names, drug-gene interactions, or wants to combine multiple DNA sources.
nonlinear-solvers
Select and configure nonlinear solvers for root-finding f(x)=0, optimization min F(x), and least-squares problems — choose among Newton, Newton-Krylov, quasi-Newton (BFGS, L-BFGS), Broyden, Anderson acceleration, and Levenberg-Marquardt methods, configure line search or trust-region globalization, diagnose convergence…
ontology-explorer
Parse, navigate, and query materials science ontology structures — browse class hierarchies, inspect individual classes and their properties, look up object and data property definitions with domain/range, search for ontology terms by keyword, and parse or summarize raw OWL/XML files. Currently supports CMSO and ASMO…
post-processing
Extract, analyze, and summarize simulation output data — pull spatial fields at specific timesteps, compute time-series trends and detect steady state, extract line profiles through the domain, generate statistical summaries and distributions, calculate derived quantities (gradients, fluxes, volume fractions…
simulation-orchestrator
Orchestrate multi-simulation campaigns — generate parameter sweep configurations (grid, linspace, or Latin Hypercube sampling), initialize and track batch job campaigns, monitor job completion status, and aggregate results with summary statistics across all runs. Use when running a parameter study across dt, kappa, or…
differentiation-schemes
Select and apply numerical differentiation schemes for PDE and ODE discretization — generate finite-difference stencils at arbitrary order and accuracy, choose between central, upwind, compact (Pade), and spectral methods, handle boundary stencils, and estimate truncation error scaling. Use when discretizing spatial…