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 raisoninme/boardless-pcb --skill step6-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/raisoninme/boardless-pcbWrote 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/raisoninme/boardless-pcb/step6-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/raisoninme/boardless-pcb/step6-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/raisoninme/boardless-pcb/step6-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 | $0.00042 | $0.03785 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.01893 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00757 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00379 |
Grade A, and why
step6-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 8d 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 — 189 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Step 6 · Per-module simulation verification
Each entry into step 6 gets a fresh session; once entered, the verify → fix → re-verify loop stays in this session until issues reach zero or the user calls a stop. Do not shuttle the user between sessions.
Session & state check (before touching anything)
- One step per session: if this session already did substantive work for another step, stop and ask for a fresh session.
- Read
docs/flow-state.md(canonical header line; foreign file → stop and ask). Confirm steps 2–5 are alldone(any step markedrework→ stop; route the user to that step's command first). Step 6waiting(structural rework was pending) → this re-entry is expected, resume normally. Step 6done→ also an expected re-entry when the issues table carriesfixed-pending-verifyentries oropenentries with targetstep6(a step-7 handoff): resume normally.donewith neither → ask the user's intent before re-running a full audit. Step 6in-progress→ a previous session aborted mid-loop or another session is live — ask the user before proceeding. Set step 6in-progress. - Issues-table triage:
openentries with target 2–5 (approved structural rework not yet executed) → stop; route the user to the matching fix mode firstfixed-pending-verifyentries (structural rework done) andopenentries with targetstep6(step-7 handoffs) → collect them; this round must verify every one and give each a verdict (§1 carries them in; §4 settles them)
- Reconcile BEFORE any round allocation (order matters — allocating first mints ghost rounds):
a. Orphan-fix scan:
docs/rework-log-*.mdattempt records journaled but never marked adopted/rejected → reconcile against the live EDA first (the journal lists touched objects and prior values): roll back or complete the targeted check. Never run a fresh audit on top of an unreconciled orphan — it would baptize the half-applied change as baseline fact. b. Ghost-round check: if the verification-rounds table's LAST row is still verdict-pending, that round died mid-flight — either resume it as the current round N, or mark itaborted(with a note) before allocating anything new. Never stack a new pending row on an unreconciled one. - Round numbering: N = the resumed pending round, or last row + 1 (empty table → N = 1). Append a new row only at the moment its amnesia audit actually starts — reconciliation always comes first.
- Keep your inputs pure: do not read the firmware or the dev documents yourself before directing the audit.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 189 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A c1b0595f1e04
step6-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository raisoninme/boardless-pcb (2 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 3,785 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
fec-component-testing
A guide for writing and reviewing front-end unit, component, and lightweight integration tests. These tests check small pieces of code and UI behavior without running a full browser journey.
e2e
Add durable end-to-end tests for user/API-visible behavior. Detect or scaffold the E2E framework, write tests, run the app, and store evidence. Use for E2E, Playwright/Cypress, regression tests, or quality gates. Not exploratory QA.
qa
Runtime QA of a change: start the app, test acceptance criteria and edge cases, and report evidence. Use for "test this", "QA", "does it work", exploratory checks, or post-review runtime verification. Not static code review.
fec-e2e-testing
A standard for real-browser end-to-end tests, which test complete user journeys across pages rather than isolated functions. It covers Playwright or Cypress, reusable page objects, test data, continuous-integration reports, screenshots, traces, videos, and unstable tests.
fec-tdd-workflow
A frontend test-driven development workflow, or TDD, describes the expected behavior with a failing test, implements the smallest change to pass it, and then refactors. It covers UI components, hooks, API clients, route guards, and user workflows.
fec-testing-strategy
A frontend testing strategy maps different risks to different checks, such as type checking, unit tests, component tests, integration tests, end-to-end tests, accessibility, security, and performance checks. It explains end-to-end testing as testing a complete user journey in a real browser.