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/iwritec0de/app-dev/verificationnpx skills add iwritec0de/app-dev --skill verificationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/iwritec0de/app-devWhat 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 | $0.00053 | $0.00855 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00428 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00171 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
verification 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 yesterday.
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 — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Skill
Evidence before claims, always. NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION.
Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE. If you have not run the verification command in the current session, you cannot claim it passes. Prior knowledge, assumptions, and memory of previous runs do not count. Only fresh output from the current session constitutes evidence.
The Five-Step Gate
Every completion claim must pass through this gate:
- Identify — Determine which command proves your claim. "Tests pass" requires running the test suite. "No lint errors" requires running the linter. "It builds" requires running the build.
- Execute — Run the command freshly. Not from memory. Not from a previous session. Right now, in the current session.
- Read — Read the FULL output. Do not skim. Do not assume. If the output is long, read all of it. Errors can hide at the end.
- Verify — Confirm the output actually supports your claim. A test suite that prints results but exits with a failure code does not pass. A build that emits warnings about missing dependencies is not clean.
- Assert — Only after steps 1-4 are complete, state your claim and include the evidence. Quote the relevant output.
JS/TS Verification Checklist
Before claiming work is complete in this project, run each applicable command and confirm clean output:
| Check | Command | What it proves |
|---|---|---|
| Type checking | tsc --noEmit |
No type errors across the project |
| Tests | npx vitest run or npm test |
All tests pass |
| Lint | npx eslint . |
No lint errors or warnings |
| Formatting | npx prettier --check . |
All files match formatting rules |
| Production build | next build |
Build succeeds, catches SSR/hydration issues |
Run these in order. A type error caught by tsc is cheaper to fix than one discovered during next build. A lint error is cheaper to fix before tests run.
If a project uses a different test runner, linter, or build tool, substitute the appropriate commands. The principle is the same: run the real tool, read the real output.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 68 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 17a6453bb2cb
verification is a skill published in the GitHub repository iwritec0de/app-dev (3 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 855 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
dummy-dataset
Generate realistic dummy datasets for testing with customizable columns, constraints, and output formats (CSV, JSON, SQL, Python script). Use when creating test data, building mock datasets, or generating sample data for development and demos.
outcome-roadmap
Transform an output-focused roadmap into an outcome-focused one that communicates strategic intent. Rewrites initiatives as outcome statements reflecting user and business impacts. Use when shifting to outcome roadmaps, making a roadmap more strategic, or rewriting feature lists as outcomes.
release-notes
Generate user-facing release notes from tickets, PRDs, or changelogs. Creates clear, engaging summaries organized by category (new features, improvements, fixes). Use when writing release notes, creating changelogs, announcing product updates, or summarizing what shipped.
retro
Facilitate a structured sprint retrospective — what went well, what didn't, and prioritized action items with owners and deadlines. Use when running a retrospective, reflecting on a sprint, creating action items from team feedback, or learning how to run effective retros.
shipping-artifacts
The durable documentation set that makes an AI-built (vibe-coded) app reviewable before shipping. A small core every app needs — architecture, user/permission flows, permissions, variables/secrets, and a test-coverage map — plus conditional docs added only when they apply: emails, scheduled work, SEO, and embedded…
stakeholder-map
Build a stakeholder map using a power/interest grid, identify communication strategies per quadrant, and generate a communication plan. Use when managing stakeholders, preparing for a launch, aligning cross-functional teams, or planning stakeholder engagement.