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 n24q02m/wet-mcp --skill fact-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/n24q02m/wet-mcpWrote 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/n24q02m/wet-mcp/fact-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/n24q02m/wet-mcp/fact-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/wet-mcp/fact-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/n24q02m/wet-mcp/fact-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/wet-mcp/fact-check.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00783 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00392 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
fact-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 11d 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
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- fact-check — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- fact-check — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fact Check
Verify a claim by actively searching for BOTH supporting and contradicting evidence. Counteracts LLM confirmation bias by enforcing adversarial search.
Steps
-
Decompose the claim into verifiable sub-claims:
- Separate factual assertions from opinions
- Identify the core falsifiable statement
- Note the domain: scientific, technical, historical, statistical, or current events
-
Search for SUPPORTING evidence using
search:search(action="search", query="[claim as stated]")- For scientific claims:
search(action="search", query="[claim] research evidence", search_type="academic") - Extract 2-3 strongest supporting sources with
extract
-
Search for CONTRADICTING evidence (mandatory — do NOT skip):
search(action="search", query="[claim] debunked OR wrong OR myth OR criticism")search(action="search", query="[opposite of claim] evidence")- For scientific claims:
search(action="search", query="[claim] replication failure OR meta-analysis", search_type="academic") - Extract 2-3 strongest contradicting sources with
extract
-
Assess source quality for each piece of evidence:
- Tier 1: Peer-reviewed journals, official statistics, primary sources
- Tier 2: Established news outlets, institutional reports, expert analysis
- Tier 3: Blogs, forums, social media, opinion pieces
- Tier 4: Anonymous sources, undated content, known biased outlets
- Discard Tier 4 unless no better sources exist
-
Produce verdict with structured output:
- Claim: [exact claim being checked]
- Verdict: Supported / Partially Supported / Disputed / Unsupported / Insufficient Evidence
- Confidence: High / Medium / Low (based on source tier and agreement)
- Supporting evidence: [bullet list with source tier tags]
- Contradicting evidence: [bullet list with source tier tags]
- Nuance: [important caveats, context-dependence, or scope limitations]
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 66 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 4ff0af3752ca
fact-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository n24q02m/wet-mcp (17 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 783 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
knowledge-audit
Review and clean up stored memories — find duplicates, contradictions, stale entries, and consolidate.
temporal-query
Answer time-travel questions over stored memory — what was believed at a past point in time, when a belief changed, and what replaced it. Use when the user says "as of", "back in", "at the time", "history of", "timeline", "what did I think then", or asks why a current memory contradicts an older one.
memory-commit
Use when the user explicitly says "remember this", "save this", "ghi nho", "luu lai", "save for next time", or otherwise asks to persist the immediately preceding context. Captures with the appropriate contexttype (decision, preference, fact, skill, task, conversation) so future sessions can retrieve it accurately.
recall-context
Use at session start, before significant decisions, or when a new task references a known project to recall mnemo memories matching the current working directory, recently edited files, or topic keywords. Helps maintain continuity across sessions and avoid redoing past research.
session-handoff
End-of-session knowledge capture — decisions, preferences, corrections, conventions, open questions.
passport-bootstrap
Use when the user installs mnemo-mcp on a fresh machine and wants to restore prior memory state from S3 or Google Drive (Phase 2 passport sync). Triggers on phrases like "set up mnemo on this machine", "restore my memory passport", "import passport", "bootstrap mnemo", or when the user says they got a new laptop / VM…