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 naimkatiman/continuous-improvement --skill verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/naimkatiman/continuous-improvementWrote 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/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/verify/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/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/verify.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 | $0.00012 | $0.00230 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00092 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00046 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
verify 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to verify — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Verify
Use this skill when the user wants confidence that a feature, fix, or refactor actually works.
Goal
Turn vague “it should work” claims into concrete evidence.
Workflow
- Identify the exact behavior that must be proven.
- Prefer existing tests first.
- If coverage is missing, run the narrowest direct verification commands available.
- If direct automation is not enough, describe the manual validation steps and gather concrete observable evidence.
- Report only what was actually verified.
Verification order
- Existing tests
- Typecheck / build
- Narrow direct command checks
- Manual or interactive validation
Rules
- Do not say a change is complete without evidence.
- If a check fails, include the failure clearly.
- If no realistic verification path exists, say that explicitly instead of bluffing.
- Prefer concise evidence summaries over noisy logs.
Output
- What was verified
- Which commands/tests were run
- What passed
- What failed or remains unverified
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 · 38 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 6cd36805efb8
verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository naimkatiman/continuous-improvement (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 230 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to verify, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
module-regression
Govern cross-module regression in large repositories with a REGRESSION.md ledger that records each module's downstream consumers and executable acceptance command. After a change, run the changed module and every affected downstream command, and use observed exit codes as regression evidence under the project's…
fix-failing-tests
Diagnose a failing test in the googleapis/mcp-toolbox repo and land a fix by reasoning from the actual error: read the failure, reproduce it, shrink it until the cause is forced into the open, then fix the cause. Use this whenever a test or CI job is red, a build breaks after a change, many packages fail at once, or a…
reproduce-bug
Reproduce a reported bug in googleapis/mcp-toolbox and decide whether it is real, delivering an evidence-backed verdict: confirmed, already fixed, misconfiguration, client-side, works as intended, not reproducible, or blocked. Use whenever a maintainer asks you to reproduce, verify, confirm, or investigate a bug…
credit-note-fixer
Fix the tiny credit-note formatting bug and rerun the exact targeted test command.
verify-omnigent
Drive Omnigent the way a user does and prove a behavior with recorded evidence, using an isolated server, runner, and mock model plus a feature map of every user entry point. Load before reproducing a user-facing bug, before claiming a fix works, or when reviewing whether a change covered every surface (session vs.…
code-review
Reviews code for bugs, security issues, and best practices.