MoAI-ADK is a Go-based harness that organizes and verifies Claude Code work across planning, implementation, synchronization, and review stages. Developers use it to structure agentic coding tasks, apply quality gates, and route work across language models, while the catalogue entries extend its workflow with skills, hooks, commands, MCP servers, instructions, and settings.
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 modu-ai/moai-adk --skill moai-workflow-docs-claim-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/modu-ai/moai-adkWrote 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/modu-ai/moai-adk/moai-workflow-docs-claim-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/modu-ai/moai-adk/moai-workflow-docs-claim-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/modu-ai/moai-adk/moai-workflow-docs-claim-check/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/modu-ai/moai-adk/moai-workflow-docs-claim-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/modu-ai/moai-adk/moai-workflow-docs-claim-check.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Prompt Injection · line 186 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 | $0.00072 | $0.02380 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.01190 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00476 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00238 |
Grade A, and why
moai-workflow-docs-claim-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 12d 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 — 225 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documentation Claim Check
Assess whether the statements a public-facing document makes are actually supported by the evidence supplied alongside it. The assessment reads, judges, and reports. It changes nothing and runs nothing.
Typical subjects: a README, a release note, an install guide, a quickstart, a migration note, a feature or compatibility table.
Hard boundaries
Three boundaries are absolute. They hold even when the request asks for more; in that case perform the assessment and decline the rest in Boundary Notes.
- No command execution. Do not run builds, tests, package managers,
linters, network requests, or any shell command as part of the assessment.
When a claim can only be settled by running something, name the exact
command and the file it should run against and label the claim
needs-human. Naming the command is the deliverable; running it is not. - No fixes. Do not produce patches, diffs, rewritten passages, or file edits. Describe what a maintainer would change and where, then stop.
- No code review and no security review. Do not assess code quality, architecture, performance, or vulnerabilities. If asked, state the boundary in Boundary Notes and continue with the claim assessment only.
Opening the files the user pointed at, to locate the evidence they supplied, is in scope — that is reading, not executing.
Phase 1 — Preflight
Complete all three steps before triaging a single claim. If a step cannot be completed, report that and stop rather than guessing.
- Confirm the document is public-facing. This skill judges documents written for users of the software: README, release notes, install and usage guides, published site pages. Internal design notes, task trackers, and private runbooks are out of scope — say so and stop.
- Inventory the supplied evidence. For every item record what it is, where it came from, its version identifier, and its timestamp. An item with neither is still usable, but record it as undated: it cannot later support a freshness judgment.
- Flag secrets for redaction before proceeding. Scan the supplied evidence for credentials, tokens, private keys, connection strings, and personal data. On a hit, flag the location for redaction, never reproduce the secret in any output, and continue only once a redacted copy is available.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 225 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 662166edc5f5
moai-workflow-docs-claim-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository modu-ai/moai-adk (1,207 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 2,380 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
code-reviewer
Automatic code quality and best practices analysis. Use proactively when files are modified, saved, or committed. Analyzes code style, patterns, potential bugs, and security basics. Triggers on file changes, git diff, code edits, quality mentions.
test-generator
Automatically suggest tests for new functions and components. Use when new code is written, functions added, or user mentions testing. Creates test scaffolding with Jest, Vitest, Pytest patterns. Triggers on new functions, components, test requests, testing mentions.
api-documenter
Auto-generate API documentation from code and comments. Use when API endpoints change, or user mentions API docs. Creates OpenAPI/Swagger specs from code. Triggers on API file changes, documentation requests, endpoint additions.
readme-updater
Keep README files current with project changes. Use when project structure changes, features added, or setup instructions modified. Suggests README updates based on code changes. Triggers on significant project changes, new features, dependency changes.
security-auditor
Continuous security vulnerability scanning for OWASP Top 10, common vulnerabilities, and insecure patterns. Use when reviewing code, before deployments, or on file changes. Scans for SQL injection, XSS, secrets exposure, auth issues. Triggers on file changes, security mentions, deployment prep.
version-check
Recommend which Claude Code version to run, or whether to update. Use when asked which Claude Code version is best/safe, whether to update now, whether a recent release is buggy, or what changed since the installed version.