validate

A guided process for deciding whether an idea is worth building. It moves through idea development, customer demand, the existing market, and an assessment that ends in GO, PIVOT, or NO-GO, with the human deciding at each gate.

In plain words
What is it for?
Running the complete idea-validation loop, including demand research, market review, assessment, and repeated checks when the evidence calls for another round.
Why use it?
It provides a structured way to test an idea before committing to build it, while keeping the key decisions with the user.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/lab2a/metalworks/validate
Any agent
npx skills add Lab2A/metalworks --skill validate
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Lab2A/metalworks

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 145 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 919 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00145 $0.00919
Opus 5 $0.00072 $0.00460
Sonnet 5 $0.00029 $0.00184
Haiku 4.5 $0.00015 $0.00092

Measured 2d ago against content hash 07393f2b93a9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

validate 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.

plugin/skills/validate/SKILL.md · 60 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 60 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Preamble (run first)

Before any other tool, run the preflight MCP tool (or metalworks preflight on the CLI). If it reports setup issues or that an update is available, surface that to the user in one line and help them resolve it (install the missing extra/key, or pip install -U metalworks) before continuing. Skip only if the user has already passed preflight this session.

Read the reference; never reverse-engineer the source. The moment you need to know how metalworks behaves — provider/model resolution, which source/reader runs, config precedence, an error you hit, or the async run loop — STOP and read docs/operating-metalworks.md (bundled with this plugin) before opening any file under src/. It is the source of truth; do not derive behavior from source. (Full docs: https://metalworks.lab2a.ai/docs.) For a long-running run, poll status with the Monitor tool or a bounded loop — never a blind sleep.

You are running a founder through the whole discovery loop, and they make the call at each gate. You drive the stages by calling the discrete tools; the human is the decision callback. The loop ends on GO (advance to building), NO-GO (kill it honestly), or when you've circled the space without a new fork to try (exhausted — say so).

The loop

Repeat until GO, NO-GO, or exhausted (cap ~4 rounds):

  1. Ideate. Call ideate_from_idea with the current idea (first round: the user's idea; later rounds: the pivot target from the previous assessment). Reflect the sharpened hypothesis back.

  2. Demand. Run a demand report on the sketch's brief (the /demand-report flow). This is the slow step — say so.

  3. Landscape. Call landscape_from_report — competitors + existing solutions + the do-nothing cost.

  4. Assess. Call assess_from_report (it runs landscape then the verdict). Present the GO/PIVOT/NO-GO honestly, with the gap (demand strength vs. saturation) and the evidence.

  5. The human decides. Show the computed recommendation, then ask the user via AskUserQuestion: GO, PIVOT, or NO-GO. They have context the corpus doesn't.

    • GO → stop. Hand off to positioning / build.
    • PIVOT → take the assessment's pivot_target (the under-served fork) as the next idea and loop. Never re-propose a fork you've already killed — track what's been ruled out.
    • NO-GO → stop. Say plainly why; that's a real answer.

Read the full file on GitHub · 60 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 60 lines · 145 tokens per session scan A 07393f2b93a9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

validate is a skill published in the GitHub repository Lab2A/metalworks (6 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 145 tokens to every session and 919 once invoked, about $0.0007 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

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.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

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.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

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.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

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…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens