Getting it into your agent
There is no command for this one: it runs only inside a plugin, and the catalogue could not identify which plugin ships it. The source is linked below.
Wrote 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/lambenthan/empiricalwiki/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lambenthan/empiricalwiki/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lambenthan/empiricalwiki/check.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00027 | $0.02112 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.01056 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00422 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00211 |
Grade A, and why
check 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 6d 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 — 185 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/check
扫描全 wiki，发现结构、链接、字段、graph 的健康问题，生成分级修复建议。 覆盖所有 9 种 entity 类型，包括 claims confidence 合理性、idea 失败原因完整性、 experiment-claim 链接有效性、graph edges 一致性。
Inputs
- 全 wiki 目录（默认
wiki/） - 可选：
--json标志（通过 tools/lint.py 输出 JSON 格式） - 可选：
--fix标志（自动修复确定性问题） - 可选：
--fix --dry-run（预览修复但不执行） - 可选：
--suggest标志（显示非自动修复问题的建议）
Outputs
- Lint report（直接报告给用户）
- 可选写入文件：
wiki/outputs/lint-report-{date}.md
Wiki Interaction
Reads
wiki/papers/*.md— 论文页面字段和链接wiki/concepts/*.md— 概念页面字段和链接wiki/topics/*.md— 方向页面字段和链接wiki/people/*.md— 人物页面字段和链接wiki/ideas/*.md— idea 状态、failure_reason、origin_gapswiki/experiments/*.md— experiment 状态、target_claim、outcomewiki/claims/*.md— claim confidence、status、evidence、source_paperswiki/Summary/*.md— 综述页面字段wiki/graph/edges.jsonl— semantic graph edge 一致性检查wiki/graph/citations.jsonl— bibliographic citation 一致性检查wiki/index.md— 对照页面完整性
Writes
- 不直接修改 wiki 内容（只报告不修复）
wiki/log.md— 通过tools/research_wiki.py log记录 lint 结果摘要
Workflow
前置：确认工作目录为 wiki 项目根（包含 wiki/、raw/、tools/ 的目录）。
设 WIKI_ROOT=wiki/。
Step 1: 运行自动化 lint 工具
默认模式（只报告）：
python3 tools/lint.py --wiki-dir wiki/ --json
自动修复模式（用户指定 --fix 时）：
python3 tools/lint.py --wiki-dir wiki/ --fix --json
自动修复确定性问题（xref 反向链接补全、缺失字段填默认值），输出修复报告。
预览模式（用户指定 --fix --dry-run 时）：
python3 tools/lint.py --wiki-dir wiki/ --fix --dry-run --json
预览会修复什么，不实际执行。
解析 JSON 输出，获取所有自动检测到的 issues（及修复结果）。
Step 2: 结构完整性（自动化覆盖）
自动化工具检查以下项目：
- Broken wikilinks：
[[slug]]目标文件不存在 - Orphan pages：无任何入链的页面
- 必填字段缺失（全 9 种 entity）：
- papers: title, slug, tags, importance
- concepts: title, tags, maturity, key_papers
- topics: title, tags
- people: name, tags
- Summary: title, scope, key_topics
- ideas: title, slug, status, origin, tags, priority
- experiments: title, slug, status, target_claim, hypothesis, tags
- claims: title, slug, status, confidence, tags, source_papers, evidence
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 185 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A fa659471f3ac
check is a skill published in the GitHub repository Lambenthan/empiricalwiki (82 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 2,112 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
paper-workflow
经管 / 社科实证论文全流程 meta-orchestrator：把选题、设计、数据、估计、方法闸门、 表图、写作、去 AI 味、质量门、修订、投稿与复盘编排成 Stage 0–9 可断点续跑流水线。 本 skill 不重复实现子能力，而是按阶段调用既有 skill 或并行 subagent，并在 Stage 3–4 路由 Python/StatsPAI、Stata、R 三种分析后端，Stage 9 交付一份含正文+表+图+参考文献的 Word 全文定稿（09submission/main.docx，另可出 .tex）。触发：/paper-workflow、 帮我写一篇实证论文、从选题到投稿、端到端 empirical…
triage-inbox
Triage academic email and calendar (Gmail / Google Calendar via the session's MCP) into a prioritized digest plus a referee-obligations tracker — classifying referee requests, R&R and editor correspondence, co-author threads, seminar and conference invites, and grant/admin deadlines, and proposing a human-gated action…
scaffold-exercises
Scaffold a graded problem set with sections, problems, worked solutions, and short "why this matters" explainers across analytical, empirical, and coding types. Use when user says "make a problem set on X", "scaffold exercises for this lecture", "create practice problems", "generate homework with a solution key"…
check-understanding
AI Engineering from Scratch 的阶段测验。用于“给我测验一下”、“测试阶段”、“检查我的理解”、“我掌握第 3 阶段了吗”，也支持 "quiz me", "test phase", "check my understanding", "do I know phase 3" 或 /check-understanding 。.
setup-matt-pocock-skills
为本仓库配置工程技能——设置其 issue tracker、分诊标签词汇表和领域文档布局。首次使用其他工程技能前运行一次。.
visual-audit
Adversarial visual-layout audit of a Quarto .qmd or Beamer .tex deck. Flags overflow, font inconsistency, box fatigue, spacing, and alignment issues. Use when user says "visual audit", "check the layout", "does this overflow?", "look for visual issues", "audit the slides", or after reworking a deck's appearance. Does…