Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tmusser/ai-engineering-skillsnpx agentmods add skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contractWrote 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/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contract/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/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/verify-contract.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 | $0.00032 | $0.02327 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00931 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00465 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00233 |
Grade A, and why
verify-contract 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 17d 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 — 262 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify Contract
Purpose
Prove the task actually works and leave durable evidence.
Verification also checks that the implementation did not exceed the behavioral contract or frozen write boundary merely because the extra work looked reasonable.
When to use
After implementation, tests, bug fixes, data runs, or smoke checks.
Inputs
- Task name
SPEC.mdacceptance criteria, non-goals, constraints, invalid-if rules, and optional implementation diff budget- Optional persisted
SCOPE.mdplus its frozen Git base - Commands run or to run
- Changed files
- Evidence to record
- Known risks or untested areas
- Optional operator profile
Verification depth
Workflow
-
Update VERIFY.md with date + task name.
-
Record commands run as short evidence entries with command, exit code, relevant output, interpretation, acceptance criterion covered, and remaining uncertainty. Keep each entry concise and auditable.
-
For new verification records, maintain a machine-readable
Structured verification evidenceJSON block alongside the human-readable evidence. Use schema version 1 and one record per meaningful check with:check,command,exit_code,evidence_source,status,evidence, plus at least one ofrecorded_atorcommit. Usenullfor command fields when evidence is manual or artifact-backed. Keep evidence short; do not copy raw logs or secrets into the JSON block. -
When
SCOPE.mdandscripts/scope_gate.pyare available, run:python scripts/scope_gate.py --base <frozen-base>Record its status and relevant violations or review triggers. A scope-gate
FAILprevents PASS.REVIEW_REQUIREDalso prevents PASS until the named review is resolved. -
If SPEC.md marks the compatibility probe gate
REQUIRED, rerun every named probe after implementation and record matching post-change evidence under the same Probe ID. Missing or mismatched probe evidence requires review; an explicit failed post-change probe prevents PASS. -
If
scripts/verify_gate.pyis available, run it before marking verification complete. When SPEC.md declares anENFORCEDimplementation diff budget, inspect the deterministicdiff-budgetresult before PASS. Budget overruns areREVIEW_REQUIRED, not automatic functional failures. If repeated iterations were used, check for a loop contract, budget, ledger, revert rule, and stop condition before calling the work done. -
Before recording
PASS, add or refresh the verification freshness anchors and stamp the repository snapshot:
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.
- 17d ago Changed · +12 lines 381c613feea6
- 20d ago Changed · +32 lines 3d4642694180
- 21d ago Changed · +21 lines 9acd69edbfda
- 22d ago Changed · +28 lines 64d68a5bfd34
- 1mo ago First seen · 169 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 9b2a0e9d60ff
verify-contract is a skill published in the GitHub repository tmusser/ai-engineering-skills (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 2,327 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
code-review
Use this skill to systematically review code changes for correctness, security, performance, maintainability, and test coverage. Activates after implementation, before merging, or when asked to review a pull request or code change. Produces a structured review report with findings categorized by severity.
tdd
Use this skill to practice test-driven development — writing tests before implementation, using tests to drive design, and validating implementation against pre-written tests. Activates when implementing new functionality, refactoring code, or fixing bugs where regression coverage is needed.
bug-diagnosis
Use this skill to systematically diagnose the root cause of a bug before attempting a fix. Activates when a bug is reported, a test is failing, or unexpected behavior is observed. Prevents guess-and-check debugging that introduces additional bugs while chasing symptoms.
skill-release-gate
Evaluate an Agent Skill bundle for structural integrity, trigger quality, artifact improvement, script correctness, safety, installed-tree integrity, and target-host portability before release.
mcore-testing
Test system for Megatron-LM. Covers test layout, recipe YAML structure, adding and running unit and functional tests, golden values, marker filters, and CI parity.
i4h-catheter-navigation-e2e
End-to-end smoke for catheter navigation covering setup, digital twin, DRR, and unit tests. Use when asked to run the full catheter workflow smoke or demo the v0.7 pipeline.