verify-artifact

verify-artifact is a skill for Claude Code from pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow. It costs 121 tokens per session (1,131 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A final-check process for files you are about to send, publish, or hand off. It rebuilds the file, checks that it opens correctly, compares it with its source, and confirms that the recipient received the intended version.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before sending papers, PDFs, releases, or other generated files to check their size, structure, contents, and source match.
Why use it?
It prevents corrupted, incomplete, stale, or silently changed files from being reviewed or published.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter.

Good fit Use it before sending papers, PDFs, releases, or other generated files to check their size, structure, contents, and source match.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/verify-artifact
About the project

claude-code-my-workflow is a forkable setup for using Claude Code to produce and review academic papers, slides, data analyses, and replication packages. Researchers use its agents, skills, rules, hooks, and quality checks to coordinate these tasks and verify their results. The catalogue entries define the reusable workflow components for Claude Code.

pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow · 1,566 stars · on GitHub · psantanna.com

Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow --skill verify-artifact
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for verify-artifact

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/verify-artifact.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/verify-artifact)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/verify-artifact"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/verify-artifact.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 121 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,131 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00121 $0.01131
Opus 5 $0.00060 $0.00566
Sonnet 5 $0.00024 $0.00226
Haiku 4.5 $0.00012 $0.00113

Measured 4d ago against content hash 3546ddf81de0, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

verify-artifact 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 4d 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.

.claude/skills/verify-artifact/SKILL.md · 63 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Verify the artifact before it leaves

A review is only as good as the thing reviewed. If the artifact is corrupt, truncated, stale, or silently renumbered, a competent reviewer will return confident findings about defects that do not exist in your work — and you will spend a cycle chasing them. This is cheap to prevent and expensive to miss.

Rule: never send a derived artifact you have not diffed against its source.

1. Rebuild from source, in one shell invocation

Never send yesterday's build. Rebuild, then copy to the send location in the same command, so nothing can change underneath you.

Cloud-synced folders (Dropbox/iCloud/OneDrive) dehydrate files: a PDF can become 0 bytes or a partial copy between building and reading it. Symptoms: Syntax Error: Couldn't find trailer dictionary, a 70 KB file that should be 700 KB. Build-tool "up to date" messages are not evidence the file is intact — the tool checks timestamps, not content. Always stage to a local (non-synced) directory and verify there.

2. Integrity checks (mechanical, fast, non-negotiable)

  • Size and structure: byte size in the expected range; page/record/row count as expected.
  • It parses: open it with a real reader (pdfinfo, pdftotext, a JSON/CSV parser, unzip -t). A file that exists is not a file that works.
  • Sample the content: first and last page/record actually contain what you expect — truncation shows up at the end.
  • Unresolved markers: for documents, count ??, [cite], TODO, XXX, \ref{ leftovers, "Chapter ??"; for code/data, NaNs, empty cells, placeholder values.

3. Diff the derived artifact against its source

This is the step people skip and the one that pays. If you produced the artifact by transforming, excerpting, compressing, or subsetting, then enumerate what could have been lost and check it:

  • Labels/anchors/IDs: set of identifiers in source vs artifact. Anything defined in source and referenced but missing in the artifact is a break.
  • Numbering: removing a numbered object silently renumbers everything after it, so a citation that was "Lemma 10" becomes "Lemma 6" — every downstream reference now points somewhere plausible and wrong. Check numbering stability, not just presence.
  • Counts: sections, tables, figures, rows, functions, endpoints — before vs after.
  • Nested content: excerpting a block can remove statements nested inside it, not just the prose you meant to cut.

Read the full file on GitHub · 63 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 4d ago First seen · 63 lines · 121 tokens per session scan A 3546ddf81de0

Subscribe to this mod's changes

verify-artifact is a skill published in the GitHub repository pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow (1,566 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 121 tokens to every session and 1,131 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-09-03.