Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TalonT-Org/AutoSkillit. 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/TalonT-Org/AutoSkillit/main/.claude/skills/verify-diag/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TalonT-Org/AutoSkillitWrote 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/talont-org/autoskillit/verify-diag)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/talont-org/autoskillit/verify-diag"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/talont-org/autoskillit/verify-diag/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/talont-org/autoskillit/verify-diag"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/talont-org/autoskillit/verify-diag.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 | $0.00050 | $0.01806 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00722 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00361 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
verify-diag 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Diagram Skill
Verify an architecture diagram's factual accuracy against the actual codebase. Adapted from the dry-walkthrough methodology for diagram validation.
When to Use
- After generating an arch lens diagram
- User says "verify diagram", "verify diag", "check diagram"
- Before finalizing diagram examples or documentation
Critical Constraints
NEVER:
- Modify source code files
- Modify the diagram during verification (report findings only)
ALWAYS:
- Verify every named component exists in the codebase
- Trace actual code paths for every connection
- Determine read/write directionality for every connection
- Report findings to terminal, not to files
Verification Workflow
Step 0: Validate Mermaid Syntax (Rendering Check)
This step runs BEFORE semantic verification. Extract every mermaid code block and check for syntax errors that would prevent rendering.
For each ```mermaid block, validate:
1. Node label quoting:
[...]node content must NOT contain unescaped double quotes- BAD:
A["value = "hello""]— inner quotes break the parser - GOOD:
A["value = hello"]orA[value = hello] - Check: scan all
[...]and(...)node definitions for"inside content
2. Bracket balance:
- Every
[has a matching]on the same line (for node definitions) - Every
(has a matching)on the same line - Exception:
([...])stadium shapes have nested brackets — count outer pair
3. Special characters in node labels:
- Parentheses
()inside[...]labels break parsing — rephrase or remove - Pipe
|inside node labels conflicts with edge label syntax - Curly braces
{}inside node labels conflict with rhombus/decision syntax - Hash
#at start of label can be misinterpreted
4. Edge label syntax:
- Edge labels must use
-->|"label"|or-->|label|format - Unmatched pipe chars on edge lines break parsing
5. Subgraph naming:
subgraph NAME ["Display Title"]— the["..."]is valid mermaid syntax- But
subgraph NAME [Display Title]without quotes is NOT valid if title has spaces
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 · 204 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A bc93d784c16f
verify-diag is a skill published in the GitHub repository TalonT-Org/AutoSkillit (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 1,806 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…