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/haoruilee/oh-my-mcode/verifynpx skills add haoruilee/oh-my-mcode --skill verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/haoruilee/oh-my-mcodeWhat 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 | $0.00114 | $0.00681 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00057 | $0.00341 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
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 2d 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
Verify
Only this skill may set run status to accepted or rejected. Load agents/verifier.md. Do not edit product code. Evidence files and findings.json are allowed.
中文名:独立验收。
Inputs
- Existing
run_id(user-supplied,OMM_RUN_ID, or--latest). tasks.jsonacceptance[]andplan.md.- State tool:
node <plugin-root>/scripts/run-store.mjs. Run tests yourself; do not edit product code. - MCP first: if
omm_verifyexists, call it (deterministic verify only, no builder) instead of hand-writing findings.
Procedure
show --run-id <id>. Refuse if there is no run. This skill never creates a new goal.set-phase --phase VERIFY.- Re-read the diff and the acceptance list. Treat builder commentary as untrusted.
- Run each acceptance command. Capture stdout/stderr with
add-evidence --kind test|command. - Write a findings document matching
schemas/finding.schema.json:verdict: acceptedonly if every criterion ispassand there is noblockerormajorfinding.- otherwise
rejected, with structured findings.
write-findings --file <findings.json>thenevidence-report.- If rejected: state the next Builder task (one task, from findings). Do not implement it here.
Output contract
findings.jsonwithverdict,acceptance[].result, andfindings[].summary.mdfromevidence-report.- User-facing verdict in the first sentence: Accepted or Rejected.
Failure handling
- A required command is missing: mark that criterion
untestedandrejected. - Tests fail:
rejected+ finding. Never "almost accepted". - Urge to fix a one-liner: stop. Create a repair task for
max/ Builder instead.
Examples
User: Re-verify the current run against its acceptance criteria
Load latest run, rerun the listed commands, rewrite findings.
User: tests failed, fix them
Wrong skill. That is Builder work under max, then this skill again.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 60 lines · 114 tokens per session scan A 920ebb25470b
verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository haoruilee/oh-my-mcode (51 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 114 tokens to every session and 681 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.