claude-code-system-prompts is a repository that records the system prompts, tool descriptions, agent prompts, and utility prompts used by Claude Code. It serves people who want to inspect how Claude Code structures its built-in agents and tools across releases. The catalogue instruction provides access to material documenting that workflow.
Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Piebald-AI/claude-code-system-promptsnpx agentmods add skills/piebald-ai/claude-code-system-prompts/skill-verify-cli-changes-example-for-verifyWrote 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/piebald-ai/claude-code-system-prompts/skill-verify-cli-changes-example-for-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/piebald-ai/claude-code-system-prompts/skill-verify-cli-changes-example-for-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/piebald-ai/claude-code-system-prompts/skill-verify-cli-changes-example-for-verify.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00025 | $0.00547 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00273 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00109 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
Skill: Verify CLI changes (example for Verify skill) 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 yesterday.
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
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- Skill: Verify CLI changes (example for Verify skill) — 97% identical, 40 lines differ
What it actually says
Verifying a CLI change
The handle is direct invocation. The evidence is stdout/stderr/exit code.
Pattern
- Build (if the CLI needs building)
- Run with arguments that exercise the changed code
- Capture output and exit code
- Compare to expected
CLIs are usually the simplest to verify - no lifecycle, no ports.
Worked example
Diff: adds a --json flag to the status subcommand. New flag
parsing in cmd/status.go, new output branch.
Claim (commit msg): "machine-readable status output."
Inference: tool status --json now exists, emits valid JSON with
the same fields the human output shows. tool status without the flag
is unchanged.
Plan:
- Build
tool status-> human output, same as before (non-regression)tool status --json-> valid JSON, parseable- JSON fields match human output fields
Execute:
go build -o /tmp/tool ./cmd/tool
/tmp/tool status
# -> Status: healthy
# -> Uptime: 3h12m
# -> Connections: 47
/tmp/tool status --json
# -> {"status":"healthy","uptime_seconds":11520,"connections":47}
/tmp/tool status --json | jq -e .status
# -> "healthy"
# (jq -e exits nonzero if the path is null/false - cheap validity check)
echo $?
# -> 0
Verdict: PASS - flag works, JSON is valid, fields line up.
What FAIL looks like
unknown flag: --json-> not wired up, or you're running a stale build- Output isn't valid JSON (
jqerrors) -> serialization bug tool status(no flag) changed -> regression; the diff touched more than it should- JSON has different field names than expected -> claim/code mismatch, might be fine, note it
Reading from stdin, destructive commands
If the CLI reads stdin -> pipe in test data. If it writes files / hits a network / deletes things -> point it at a tmp dir / a mock / a dry-run flag. If there's no safe mode and the diff touches the destructive path, say so and verify what you can around it.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 74 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 4de5c4518fb2
Skill: Verify CLI changes (example for Verify skill) is a skill published in the GitHub repository Piebald-AI/claude-code-system-prompts (12,585 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 547 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 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
llm-testing-expert
Use this skill when user needs to design LLM evaluation strategies, build test datasets, or ensure model quality. Trigger keywords: LLM testing, model evaluation, prompt engineering, regression testing, red teaming, hallucination detection, RAG testing, Agent testing, A/B testing, LLM-as-a-Judge. Applicable to quality…
testing-expert
Expert software testing: unit/integration/e2e, TDD, test doubles, fixtures, and flakiness. Trigger keywords: testing, unit test, integration test, e2e, TDD, mock, stub, fake, spy, fixture, coverage, flaky test, assertion, test pyramid, snapshot. Use for writing tests, designing test strategy, or fixing…
research-engineer
An uncompromising Academic Research Engineer. Operates with absolute scientific rigor, objective criticism, and zero flair. Focuses on theoretical correctness, formal verification, and optimal implementation across any required technology.
tika-eval-compare
Compare extracts from two Tika builds over a corpus to detect regressions in content, encoding, exceptions, and embedded-document handling. Use for "compare before/after extracts", "eval this change against the corpus".
neuron-evaluation-engineer
Create and run AI evaluations with datasets, assertions, and output drivers in Neuron AI. Use this skill whenever the user mentions evaluation, testing AI systems, creating evaluators, dataset-driven testing, assertion-based validation, or wants to measure AI system performance. Also trigger for tasks involving…
jetson-validate-image
Use after jetson-flash-image to run static BSP checks, on-target smoke/regression tests on a flashed DUT, or both. Not for build or flash steps. Triggers: validate bsp, on-target validation.