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 mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot --skill verification-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilotWrote 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/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/verification-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/verification-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/verification-loop/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/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/verification-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/verification-loop.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00633 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00253 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00127 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
verification-loop 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Loop
Run all quality gates before committing or creating a PR.
When to Use
- Before any git commit
- Before creating a pull request
- After completing implementation (before marking done)
- When asked to "verify" or "check everything"
Procedure
Step 1: Detect Project Type
Identify available tools from project files:
package.json: npm/yarn scripts (lint, typecheck, test)pyproject.toml/setup.py: Python tooling (ruff, mypy, pytest)go.mod: Go tooling (golangci-lint, go vet, go test)Cargo.toml: Rust tooling (clippy, cargo test)
Step 2: Run Quality Gates
Execute in order (stop on CRITICAL):
| Gate | Command (detect per project) | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| Lint | eslint, ruff, golangci-lint | HIGH |
| Type Check | tsc --noEmit, mypy, go vet | HIGH |
| Tests | jest, pytest, go test | CRITICAL |
| Security | npm audit, pip-audit, cargo audit | CRITICAL |
| Coverage | jest --coverage, pytest --cov | HIGH |
Step 3: Report Results
Verification: {project name}
Lint: PASS | FAIL ({count} issues)
Types: PASS | FAIL ({count} errors)
Tests: PASS | FAIL ({pass}/{total})
Security: PASS | FAIL ({count} vulnerabilities)
Coverage: {percent}% (target: 80%)
Verdict: READY TO COMMIT | BLOCKED ({reason})
Step 4: Actionable Fixes
For each failure, provide:
{gate} FAIL:
{file}:{line} - {error message}
Fix: {specific suggestion}
Blocking Rules
- CRITICAL failures block commit (tests failing, known vulnerabilities)
- HIGH failures: warn but allow commit with acknowledgment
- MEDIUM/LOW: report only, do not block
Output Format
Verification: lead-scoring-simulator
Lint: PASS
Types: PASS
Tests: PASS (24/24)
Security: PASS
Coverage: 87% (target: 80%)
Verdict: READY TO COMMIT
Rules
- Always run tests with verbose output
- Kill any hung processes after 120s timeout
- If a gate tool is not installed, skip it with a warning
- Never auto-fix lint issues without showing what changed
- Clean up test artifacts after run
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 · 96 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 817704b196f5
verification-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot (22 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 633 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
dev-tdd
TDD development with Red-Green-Refactor cycle. Use to implement a feature by writing tests BEFORE the code. Trigger automatically when the user asks for TDD, wants to write tests first, mentions "test first", or asks to implement, add, create, fix, correct code, a new feature, a bugfix, or a functionality.
qa-e2e
End-to-end tests with Playwright or Cypress. Trigger when the user wants to create user journey tests, UI integration tests, or browser automation.
dev-prisma
Pointer to Prisma's own agent skills (prisma-cli, prisma-client-api...) and how to install them, plus the schema-change workflow. Use for Prisma ORM work (schema, migrations, queries, schema.prisma) only when no prisma- skill is installed; when one is, use it instead.
qa-chrome
Visual tests and browser debugging via Chrome. Use to test web pages, verify visual rendering, debug with the console, or automate browser actions. Trigger when the user mentions "visual test", "Chrome", "browser", "browser console", "DOM", "screenshot", "GIF".
api-mocking
API mock configuration for tests. Trigger when the user wants to mock APIs, use MSW, or test without a backend.
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.