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 Mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills --skill verify-before-claimgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skillsWrote 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/mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills/verify-before-claim)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills/verify-before-claim"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills/verify-before-claim/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/mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills/verify-before-claim"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills/verify-before-claim.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 | $0.00029 | $0.01206 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00482 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00241 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00121 |
Grade A, and why
verify-before-claim 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 1mo 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- verify-before-claim — 86% identical, 15 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Before Claim
<skill_contract> One falsifiable claim, its artifact or system, risk, expected result, permissions, and available checks. A scoped claim decision with fresh evidence, residual risk, approval, and rollback status. The cheapest direct check after the final material change supports the exact allowed wording. <non_goals>Producing the artifact, inferring success from effort, or widening a claim beyond checked evidence.</non_goals>
No evidence, no claim. Match the check to the exact claim, use fresh evidence, and keep execution authority separate from approval authority for consequential actions.
Usage Template
Provide: proposed claim, artifact or system, risk level, available checks, expected result, permissions, and rollback path.
Workflow
- Rewrite the proposed statement as one falsifiable claim.
- Classify risk: low, material, or consequential.
- Select the cheapest check that directly tests the claim.
- Record expected signal, time boundary, and acceptable evidence.
<unknowns_gate>
If the artifact, expected behavior, or verification method is missing, return NEEDS_INPUT. If only indirect evidence exists, return INSUFFICIENT_EVIDENCE or narrow the claim; never fill the gap with confidence language.
</unknowns_gate>
Run the selected check after the final material change. Examples: targeted test, lint, build, link check, read-after-write, diff inspection, source comparison, dashboard query, or deployment health check. Capture command/query, timestamp, scope, exit status, and key output.
Treat runtime termination as control evidence, not task evidence. A normalized
complete signal still needs the acceptance check; a tool request needs a host
execution receipt; truncation needs a checkpoint; refusal/error/unknown cannot
support completion. A claimed NO_OP needs a fresh eligibility query, an
output-count check, and proof that no prohibited side effect occurred.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 118 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 117cf64386bb
verify-before-claim is a skill published in the GitHub repository Mark393295827/third-brain-v7-skills (141 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,206 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
local-qa
A quality-assurance procedure that adds or updates tests and a repair guide whenever a software component changes. Quality assurance means checking that software still works and can be fixed later.
tt
Quality gate immediately after building: prove that what was just built actually works, while the context is still hot. Six steps: scope what changed, run live on real data, break it on purpose, show a counter or log proving it ran, root-cause any failure and re-run, then a verdict with evidence. Only a green verdict…
local-fb-alpha
A comment-analysis workflow that extracts links and ideas from Anton’s Facebook posts, fetches each resource, and tests it against an existing solution.
red-first-review
Review someone else's pull request by measuring which of its own guards its own test suite actually catches, via a small mutation matrix. Use when reviewing a PR, checking whether a regression test is real, or asked 'is this change actually tested?', 'does this test do anything', 'mutation test this'.
pos-verify
Use this immediately after files are created, edited, moved, deleted, or materially rewritten inside PersonalOS. Verifies that new truth was routed to the correct owner, written in the correct file shape, and still follows POS conventions. Do NOT use for whole-vault deep audits; use system-health-check.
tdd
A test-first development workflow based on TDD, or test-driven development. It writes a failing test, adds code to make it pass, and then improves the code without changing its behavior.