Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to mihai-dinculescu/tapo. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/main/.claude/skills/verify-device-support/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mihai-dinculescu/tapoWrote 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/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/verify-device-support)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/verify-device-support"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/verify-device-support/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/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/verify-device-support"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mihai-dinculescu/tapo/verify-device-support.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00067 | $0.02608 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.01043 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00522 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00261 |
Grade A, and why
verify-device-support 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 14d 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 — 111 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Device Support
Device support is stated in many places and none of them is generated from the others. This skill checks that they all agree with the code, which is the source of truth:
DeviceType::from_modelintapo/src/api/discovery/device_type.rssays which model strings the library knows and which category each belongs toDiscoveryResult::newintapo/src/api/discovery/discovery_result.rssays which handler each category gets- the
modelmatch intapo/src/responses/child_device_list_hub_result/child_device_hub_result.rssays which hub child models are decoded, and so which child handler each gets - each handler's
pubmethods (explicit ones plus the onestapo_handler!,tapo_child_handler!andhub_child_handlers!generate) say what it can do, and#[cfg(feature = "debug")]says which of them need thedebugfeature
Run the whole skill whenever a device model is added or removed, a handler gains or loses a method, a method's debug gating changes, or on request. On its own, this skill reports and does not change anything. When /pre-commit invokes it, or the user asked for the findings to be fixed, fix every finding, rerun the script until it exits 0, and report what was changed. Never post anywhere.
Step 1: Run the mechanical checks
python -I .claude/skills/verify-device-support/scripts/device_inventory.py
The script reads the sources above and compares them with every documentation surface listed in Step 2. It prints one line per mismatch, prefixed with the check that found it, and exits 1 when there are any. Lines prefixed note: are not findings. They point at wording that is a superset of what the code serves (a shared device-info type, the camera doc naming untested models, a model alias the device reports) and need a human decision, which Step 3 covers.
If the script crashes or reports that it cannot find a handler, a table column, or a mapping, the code moved in a way the script does not understand. Fix the script in the same change, then rerun it. Do not work around it by reading the files by hand only; the script is what keeps the next run honest.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 14d ago Changed 0d6b0b9e61d3
- 20d ago First seen · 111 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 3ba1b470170e
verify-device-support is a skill published in the GitHub repository mihai-dinculescu/tapo (865 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 2,608 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-10-08.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
ring:mapping-feature-relationships
Mapping how features relate and phasing the work: categorizing PRD features, grouping them into domains, charting cross-feature journeys, dependencies, and integration points, and defining the binding Phases that plan.md mirrors one-to-one at Gate 7. Gate 2 of ring:planning-large-features; runs after…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.