Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Rethunk-AI/clodbridge. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Rethunk-AI/clodbridge/main/.cursor/skills/incremental-validation/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Rethunk-AI/clodbridgeWrote 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/rethunk-ai/clodbridge/incremental-validation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rethunk-ai/clodbridge/incremental-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rethunk-ai/clodbridge/incremental-validation/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/rethunk-ai/clodbridge/incremental-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rethunk-ai/clodbridge/incremental-validation.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 | $0.00019 | $0.01696 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00678 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00339 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00170 |
Grade A, and why
incremental-validation 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 283 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Incremental Validation
The Golden Rule
Validate early and often. Find errors when they're small, not after you've written 1000 lines.
Validation Frequency Guideline
| Milestone | Validate? | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| After writing 1 file (< 100 LOC) | Optional | Read for syntax | Tiny files are easy to spot-check |
| After writing 2-3 files (100-300 LOC) | YES | tsc --noEmit |
Catch type errors before they cascade |
| After finishing a commit | YES | npm test |
Ensure behavior is correct |
| Before committing | YES | Both checks | Never commit broken code |
| After a subsystem (5+ files) | YES | Integration test | Verify systems work together |
Validation Checklist
After writing code, before proceeding:
[ ] TypeScript compiles without errors
npm run typecheck
(Should output: 0 errors)
[ ] No syntax errors or import failures
Read for obvious typos, unresolved imports
[ ] Tests pass (if you wrote tests)
npm test
(Should show: N passed, 0 failed)
[ ] All imports resolve
No "Cannot find module" errors
[ ] No unused variables
TypeScript strict mode catches these
Error Cascade Prevention
Scenario A: BAD (Validate After Everything)
Write types.ts (50 LOC)
Write parse.ts (150 LOC)
Write rules.ts (200 LOC)
Write skills.ts (100 LOC)
Write agents.ts (150 LOC)
↓ npm test
↓ 47 errors
↓ Spend 2 hours debugging
↓ Error was actually in types.ts
Problem: The error is hidden in a sea of code. Took 2 hours to find.
Scenario B: GOOD (Validate After Each File)
Write types.ts (50 LOC) → npm run typecheck ✓
↓ (commit)
Write parse.ts (150 LOC) → npm test ✓
↓ (commit)
Write rules.ts (200 LOC) → npm run typecheck ✓
↓ (commit)
Write skills.ts (100 LOC) → npm run typecheck ✓
↓ (commit)
Write agents.ts (150 LOC) → npm run typecheck ✓
↓ (commit)
Each validation takes 5-10 seconds.
Any error caught immediately.
Benefit: Errors caught in context. Fixed in 30 seconds instead of 2 hours.
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 · 283 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 39e8c1e291d4
incremental-validation is a skill published in the GitHub repository Rethunk-AI/clodbridge (0 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,696 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
coding-agents-hooks-authoring
To author, register, and test Rosetta hooks, add a SemanticKind, or debug a hook that won't fire.
testgen-flow
Workflow for generating test cases from requirements (Issue Tracker / Wiki sources), exporting to a Test Management System, etc.
api-aqa-flow
Workflow for backend API test automation: TMS / Issue Tracker test cases → automated API tests, HITL-gated.
ui-aqa-flow
Workflow for automated QA: integration and end-to-end UI test automation, page objects, etc.
qa-knowledge
To run QA engineering — requirements/gap analysis, scenario & spec design, test implementation, failure triage — over the QA knowledge base.
coding-flow
Light coding workflow: features, fixes, refactors, unit tests, etc.; scales small to large.