Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add shalintripathi/organic-os/plugin install organic-osWrote 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/shalintripathi/organic-os/hoo-verify-outcome)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/hoo-verify-outcome"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/hoo-verify-outcome/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/shalintripathi/organic-os/hoo-verify-outcome"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/hoo-verify-outcome.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 | $0.00052 | $0.01232 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00616 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00246 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00123 |
Grade A, and why
hoo-verify-outcome scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 109 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify an outcome (recompute first, read the claim second)
Takes an item slug or a path to a record in outcomes/. The job is to
recompute the number from raw data and only then look at what the record
claimed, so the recomputation cannot be steered by the answer.
Read-only over the brain except for the run report and the one signal in step 5. Nothing here changes an item's status, edits an outcome record, or touches the claimed numbers.
1. Identity, URL, windows - and nothing else
PYTHONPATH="$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/lib" python3 -c into
core.outcomes.parse_outcome(<path>), and use ONLY these three from what
comes back:
item- which item this isurl- the page to pullwindows- the before and after date ranges the claim was measured over
Do not read claimed_before, claimed_after, or claimed_delta yet, and
do not print them. This is the whole exercise. A number you have already
seen is a number you will unconsciously reproduce: the pull gets framed
around it, a mismatch gets re-run "to check", and the verification becomes a
confirmation. Steps 2 and 3 happen with the claim unread.
No windows in the record: derive them from applied_at (the 28 days
after, against the same 28 days before) and say in the report that the
windows were derived, not read. No applied_at either - stop and report
the record as unverifiable, naming the missing key. Do not invent a window.
An item slug rather than a path: resolve it to outcomes/<item-id>.md in
the active brain (registry.get_active()). No such record - say so and
stop; there is nothing to verify.
2. Pull the raw windows independently
Through the configured capability slots (ADR-0009), not from anything the brain already stored:
- search-data (GSC for most sites): clicks, impressions, CTR, and
average position for
urlover each window. - analytics (GA4 for most sites), when configured: sessions for
urlover the same windows.
Never substitute a stored signal line for a fresh pull. A signal is the brain's own prior reading, so checking a claim against it verifies nothing.
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 · 109 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 0058a29f7891
hoo-verify-outcome is a skill published in the GitHub repository shalintripathi/organic-os (5 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 1,232 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
seo-vertical-detect
Classify a website as ecommerce, local-business, blog-publisher, saas, docs, or generic (multiple may apply), and report detected locales, from the persisted PageSnapshot plus the platform detector's vertical hints. Used by seo-orchestrator to decide which conditional modules to run and how to reweight the scores.
seo-fix-apply
Writer protocol preloaded into the seo-fixer-writer agent — how confirmed SEO/AI-search fixes are applied (git pre-flight, backup, Edit/Write for local diffs, ticketed adapter CLIs for remote targets, re-verify, publish only on a second ticket, rollback) and the findings-array output contract. Used only by the fix…
audit
Audit a website or web codebase for SEO and AI-search (GEO/AEO) — produces two independent 0-100 scores (Search SEO + AI Visibility) plus a prioritized, evidence-backed report persisted on disk. Read-only; never writes to the project. Use when the user asks to audit, analyze, check, or score a site's SEO, structured…
ai-visibility
Fast-path AI visibility — get a brand's 0–100 Akii Visibility Score (computed by an open-source LLM judge against the brand's public footprint) with four-dimension breakdown AND a per-engine proxy map for ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI Overviews based on FirstPageSage signal weights.…
optimize-page
Comprehensive single-page optimization across all three layers — traditional SEO (title / meta / H1 / internal links), AEO (chunk quality, direct-answer leads, FAQ extraction), and GEO rewrites using the tactics published by the Princeton/IIT Delhi GEO study (citation integration, expert quotes, statistics enrichment…
seo-audit
Single audit entry point — surface-level scorecard or deep infrastructure dive depending on the requested mode. Default full mode produces a multi-layer scorecard across all 9 areas (crawlability, indexation, meta tags, headings, images, Core Web Vitals, JS rendering, mobile + security, structured data, internal…