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 T4LEL/Claude-Arsenal --skill validate-ideagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/T4LEL/Claude-ArsenalWrote 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/t4lel/claude-arsenal/validate-idea)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/t4lel/claude-arsenal/validate-idea"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/t4lel/claude-arsenal/validate-idea/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/t4lel/claude-arsenal/validate-idea"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/t4lel/claude-arsenal/validate-idea.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00736 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00368 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
validate-idea 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 9d 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Validate Idea
Kill or confirm an idea cheaply before /new-project scaffolds anything. No code, no scaffolding — this skill produces a verdict, not a repo.
Copy this checklist and check off items as you complete them:
Validate-Idea Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Frame — customer, problem, current alternative
- [ ] Step 2: Evidence — competitor scan + demand signals
- [ ] Step 3: Verdict — would they pay, differentiation
- [ ] Step 4: Cheapest real-world test
- [ ] Report
Step 1 — Frame
State each in one sentence. Use what the user gave; where they left gaps, state an assumption explicitly and label it unverified.
- Who exactly is the customer?
- What painful problem are they having?
- What do they use today instead (including "nothing" or "a spreadsheet")?
Vague answers here (e.g. "everyone," "it'd just be useful") are the first sign the idea isn't ready — say so instead of pushing forward.
Step 2 — Evidence
Delegate to the researcher agent with the framing from Step 1:
- Competitor scan: real products, real URLs, current prices — not "probably around $X."
- Demand signals: actual search results, community complaints and threads (Reddit, forums, X, App Store reviews) showing people describing this exact pain.
No evidence found is itself a finding — report it, don't paper over it with assumptions.
For a deeper pass — market sizing (TAM/SAM/SOM) or a full competitive landscape — delegate to the market-analyst agent with the same Step 1 framing.
Step 3 — Verdict
Delegate to the biz-strategist agent with the Step 2 evidence:
- Would the target customer actually pay for this, and roughly how much?
- What's the differentiation from what they use today — why switch?
- A verdict — go / no-go / pivot — with the reasoning that drove it, not just the label.
Numbers the agent can't source from real evidence get labeled unverified assumptions, not stated as fact.
Step 4 — Cheapest real-world test
Pick exactly ONE, matched to how fast/cheap it is to run for this idea:
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 70 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 8a2b4197d7ff
validate-idea is a skill published in the GitHub repository T4LEL/Claude-Arsenal (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 736 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
workers-best-practices
Cloudflare Workers best practices for production applications. Use when writing, reviewing, or configuring Workers.
find-journalists
Build, refine, dedupe, and enrich small fit-checked journalist lists for newsjack campaigns. Uses the newsjack CLI (preferred) or the medialyst MCP for news search and journalist enrichment, and falls back to a best-effort local mode with no verified contacts; the agent owns how returned data is organized.
story-origin-check
Recover the first public timestamp and canonical major coverage for a newsjacking signal, then decide whether newer coverage is the same story, a different story, or a materially new development.
relevance-coarse-filter
Cheap, high-recall first-pass filter that removes obvious junk from a detector candidate pool before expensive story-origin research and PR judgment. Decides keep, monitoronly, or reject — never ranks, writes angles, verifies dates, or decides whether to pitch.
annotating-task-lineage
Annotate Airflow tasks with data lineage using inlets and outlets. Use when the user wants to add lineage metadata to tasks, specify input/output datasets, or enable lineage tracking for operators without built-in OpenLineage extraction.
checking-freshness
Quick data freshness check. Use when the user asks if data is up to date, when a table was last updated, if data is stale, or needs to verify data currency before using it.