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 rlespinasse/agent-skills --skill verify-readme-featuresgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rlespinasse/agent-skillsWrote 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/rlespinasse/agent-skills/verify-readme-features)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rlespinasse/agent-skills/verify-readme-features"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rlespinasse/agent-skills/verify-readme-features/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/rlespinasse/agent-skills/verify-readme-features"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rlespinasse/agent-skills/verify-readme-features.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00061 | $0.01346 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00673 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00269 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
verify-readme-features 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 12d 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 — 141 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify README Features
You are helping the user verify that every feature claim in their project's README (or similar documentation file) is backed by actual implementation in the codebase.
When to Use
- After updating a feature list in documentation
- Before a release, to ensure docs match reality
- When onboarding to a project and wanting to trust the README
- When refactoring or removing features that may still be documented
Verification Process
Step 1: Identify Feature Claims
- Read the documentation file (default:
README.mdin the project root) - Extract each feature claim — every bullet point, heading, or sentence that describes a capability of the project
- Note specific sub-claims — if a feature says "with X, Y, and Z", each of X, Y, and Z is a separate claim to verify
Step 2: Search the Codebase
For each feature claim:
- Identify keywords — extract the key terms that would appear in an implementation (function names, config keys, CSS classes, module names)
- Search source files — use grep/glob to find implementations matching those keywords
- Read the relevant code — confirm the implementation matches the claim, not just the name
- Note the evidence — record the file path and line number(s) where the feature is implemented
Step 3: Classify Each Claim
Assign one of these statuses:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Confirmed | Implementation found that matches the claim |
| Partial | Implementation exists but does not fully match the claim |
| Not found | No implementation found for this claim |
| Overstated | Implementation exists but the claim exaggerates its capabilities |
Step 4: Report Results
Present results in a summary table grouped by documentation section, with columns:
| Feature | Status | Evidence |
|---|
Where:
- Feature: the claim as written in the documentation
- Status: one of the statuses from Step 3
- Evidence: file path and brief description of what was found (or what is missing)
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 141 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A fff79cf3f5fc
verify-readme-features is a skill published in the GitHub repository rlespinasse/agent-skills (10 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 1,346 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
code-review-and-quality
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
code-review-ai-ai-review
You are an expert AI-powered code review specialist combining automated static analysis, intelligent pattern recognition, and modern DevOps practices. Leverage AI tools (GitHub Copilot, Qodo, GPT-5, C.
agentflow
Orchestrate autonomous AI development pipelines through your Kanban board (Asana, GitHub Projects, Linear). Manages multi-worker Claude Code dispatch, deterministic quality gates, adversarial review, per-task cost tracking, and crash-proof pipeline execution.
Subagent-Driven Development
Execute implementation plan by dispatching fresh subagent for each task, with code review between tasks.
andrej-karpathy
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.
audit-integrity
Shared audit integrity framework for all AppSec agents — enforces output quality, intellectual honesty, and continuous improvement through anti-rationalization guards, self-critique loops, retry protocols, non-negotiable behaviors, self-reflection quality gates (1-10 scoring, ≥8 threshold), and a self-learning system…