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 SerhiiKorniienko/bullshit-detector --skill coverage-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SerhiiKorniienko/bullshit-detectorWrote 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/serhiikorniienko/bullshit-detector/coverage-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/serhiikorniienko/bullshit-detector/coverage-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serhiikorniienko/bullshit-detector/coverage-check/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/serhiikorniienko/bullshit-detector/coverage-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serhiikorniienko/bullshit-detector/coverage-check.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 | $0.00075 | $0.01413 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00707 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00283 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00141 |
Grade A, and why
coverage-check 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 — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
coverage-check
Ten URLs are not ten sources. This turns "lots of outlets reported it" into a number you can defend.
When to reach for it
During claim verification, when a claim looks corroborated by volume — a pile of search results all saying the same thing. That pattern has two very different causes:
- Many newsrooms independently established the fact → genuinely strong evidence
- One press release, wire story, or study got reprinted 40 times → one source
Search results look identical in both cases. This tells them apart.
Usage
uv run scripts/coverage.py "<query>" [--timespan 3m] [--max 250] [--sort dateasc] [--timeout 120] [--json]
It is slow. This is normal. GDELT takes ~15s for a trivial one-day query and considerably longer
for a 3-month window at 250 records. The script prints progress to stderr and how long the call took,
so you can tell "working" from "hung" — if you see the querying line, wait. Narrowing --timespan is
the speed lever; raise --timeout before assuming it's broken.
The query accepts GDELT operators: "exact phrase", (a OR b), -exclude,
domain:example.com, sourcelang:english. Quote the distinctive phrasing of the claim — a
verbatim phrase is what catches reprints.
# Is this "40 outlets confirmed it" or one wire story?
uv run scripts/coverage.py '"quantum breakthrough" AND university'
# Narrow to the week the claim surfaced
uv run scripts/coverage.py '"record quarterly revenue" domain:reuters.com' --timespan 7d
Reading the output
The first line is the verdict the detector needs. The rest supports it.
- Distinct story clusters — articles grouped by headline similarity. This is the origin estimate. Outlets ≫ clusters means syndication.
- ⚠️ syndicated on a cluster — multiple outlets published the same story inside 24h. Treat the whole cluster as one source.
- wire-attributed headline on a cluster — a headline names a wire service or press-release distributor (Reuters, AP, PR Newswire…). The strongest mechanical one-origin signal available at headline level; bodies would catch more, but GDELT returns none.
- Duplicate URLs collapsed — the same page counted twice behind tracking params,
www., or a trailing slash. Collapsed before anything else is counted, so every number below it is already deduplicated. - Span (hours) — a tight burst points at a press release or embargo lift; coverage developed over weeks is more likely independent.
What ships with it
2 files 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 · 106 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A ba627e5b3c10
coverage-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository SerhiiKorniienko/bullshit-detector (142 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,413 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
cred1
Look up domain credibility scores using the CRED-1 open dataset. Use when checking if a news source or website is reliable, flagged as misinformation, or has credibility concerns.
fact-check-social-media-posts
Verify claims in social media posts by checking evidence, evaluating source independence, and flagging rhetorical fallacies.
secure-auth
Secure authentication patterns (OWASP, NIST). Use for login, registration, password reset, sessions, JWT, OAuth, MFA, passkeys.
academic-writing
Scholarly writing and research compliance. Use for CRediT, preregistration, Plan S, Nelson Memo, preprints, ORCID, LLM disclosure.
page-monitoring
Web page change detection, availability tracking, and RSS feed generation. Use to monitor changes, downtime, or make a feed.
web-archiving
Web archiving and retrieval via Wayback Machine and Archive.today. Use to preserve content, reach dead pages, or save evidence.