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 gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill verification-contractgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflowWrote 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/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/verification-contract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/verification-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/verification-contract/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/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/verification-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/verification-contract.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 | $0.00044 | $0.01038 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00415 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00208 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
verification-contract 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 28d 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 — 104 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Contract (internal)
Single owner of the delivery finish line. Planning freezes it; executors may strengthen coverage but cannot move it; review checks the same bytes.
Artifact
Every new feature/fix carries ACCEPTANCE.md beside its SPEC. Copy the matching
repository template. Required parts: Status: frozen; one stable ID per SPEC
criterion; Required outcome; named Validator; literal quality floor; project
commands. Prefer commands, otherwise use read-verified: <evidence> or
manual: <exact observation>. Unlabelled prose is invalid. A planned test may
name its future project runner; it cannot substitute a narrower runner later.
Validator stability. A validator must never gate on a surface other workflow actors mutate — the branch diff as a whole, the session log, progress entries, review ledgers, or forge state — because any out-of-unit commit (a session-log append, another unit's fold) then re-fails a frozen criterion on a finished unit and re-opens its review loop. Grep the unit's own files and outputs; a diff-based validator enumerates the unit's paths or excludes the workflow-mutated surfaces explicitly (docs/LOGS.md, the unit's own docs directory, harness/toolstate).
Freeze and receipt
At first execution run git hash-object <unit>/ACCEPTANCE.md and append to the
unit progress file:
## Acceptance receipt v1
- Manifest: <path> · Blob: <sha> · Status: frozen · Verified: <date>
Before every phase and final review, recompute it. Exact match continues; missing/mismatched evidence stops before edits:
ACCEPTANCE GATE — <unit> BLOCKED
Expected blob: <sha|missing> · Actual: <sha|missing>
Reason: the frozen finish line is missing or changed.
→ Next: restore the frozen manifest, or obtain explicit user approval for a
SPEC amendment and replacement manifest; then write a fresh receipt
· never edit tests, commands, or acceptance to make the current candidate pass
A legitimate change requires, in order: explicit user approval; dated SPEC
## Amendments row; replacement manifest; committed fresh receipt. The
executor never self-authorizes it.
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.
- 28d ago Changed 21f7154992b1
- 1mo ago Changed · +6 lines 920c16ef238d
- 1mo ago Changed · +11 lines · -4 tokens per session c04db655beca
- 1mo ago Changed · +9 lines c4181892a695
- 1mo ago First seen · 78 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 02141fe84d20
verification-contract is a skill published in the GitHub repository gtrabanco/agentic-workflow (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,038 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
offensive-fuzzing
Practical offensive fuzzing methodology covering target identification, fuzzer selection (AFL++, libFuzzer, Honggfuzz, Boofuzz, syzkaller), harness writing, corpus curation, mutation strategies, coverage measurement, and crash triage. Use when setting up or running fuzz campaigns against any target: file parsers…
offensive-business-logic
Business logic vulnerability testing for web/mobile/API engagements. Covers workflow bypass, state machine violations, multi-step process abuse, price/quantity/discount manipulation, currency confusion, coupon stacking, refund/chargeback abuse, race conditions on logic boundaries, parameter tampering for hidden flows…
offensive-race-condition
Race condition (TOCTOU) testing checklist: identifying timing windows, Burp Suite Turbo Intruder, Last-Byte sync technique, rate limit bypass, double-spend attacks, and concurrent request exploitation. Use for web app race condition testing or bug bounty time-of-check-to-time-of-use bugs.
setup-playwright
Use when adding, extending, or repairing a repo-owned Playwright test harness across Node Playwright Test, Playwright Pytest, or .NET/Java test frameworks. Also use when explicitly persisting @playwright/cli developer tooling, or adding or regenerating Playwright Test Agent definitions for a compatible Node Playwright…
tester-mindset
Testing mindset skill for context-driven test strategy, exploratory testing, validation design, acceptance criteria, oracles, weak-test detection, edge cases, heuristics, checklists, and evidence review for code, products, plans, or claims. Use when the user asks what to test, how to test, whether evidence is enough…
playwright-testing
Use for explicitly requested live browser investigation with playwright-cli, or for writing, debugging, reviewing, or hardening Playwright tests in an existing working harness across Node, Python, .NET, or Java. Covers flake triage, locator refinement, visual and responsive checks, test structure, fixtures, auth-state…