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 agentmods add skills/topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent/progressive-verification-debuggingnpx skills add topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent --skill progressive-verification-debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agentWrote 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/topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent/progressive-verification-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent/progressive-verification-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent/progressive-verification-debugging.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00091 | $0.01702 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00851 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00340 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00170 |
Grade A, and why
progressive-verification-debugging 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 6d 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 — 237 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Progressive Verification Methodology
Problem
When debugging complex systems (ML training, distributed systems, integrations), it's easy to:
- Waste time checking logs without a strategy
- Assume the wrong component is broken
- Try complex solutions before understanding root cause
- Get overwhelmed by multiple potential failure points
Context / Trigger Conditions
Use this methodology when:
- Silent crashes with no error messages
- "Works on my machine" but fails elsewhere
- Multiple layers: environment → code → data → model
- Version compatibility issues suspected
- Need to isolate environment vs code issues
Classic symptoms:
- Process exits silently after starting
- GPU utilization 0-1% despite training script running
- Empty log files despite process being active
- Different behavior across platforms (Mac vs WSL2 vs Linux)
Solution
Core Principle
"先要用简单代码验证环境,然后判断是不是配置问题"
Always start with the simplest test, gradually increase complexity.
Progressive Verification Steps
Create a test ladder from simplest to most complex:
Level 1: Basic Infrastructure
├── Test: torch.randn(2, 3).cuda()
└── Validates: CUDA driver, GPU access
Level 2: Core Components
├── Test: nn.Linear(10, 5).cuda()
└── Validates: Model creation, CUDA memory allocation
Level 3: Real Models
├── Test: ResNet50(weights=None).cuda()
└── Validates: Complex model architecture
Level 4: Data Pipeline (Synthetic)
├── Test: DataLoader with random tensors
└── Validates: DataLoader, multiprocessing
Level 5: Data Pipeline (Real)
├── Test: PIL.Image.open + transforms
└── Validates: File I/O, image decoding
Level 6: Training Loop
├── Test: Single forward + backward pass
└── Validates: Optimization, gradient flow
Decision Tree
Does Level N pass?
├── Yes: Proceed to Level N+1
└── No: Issue is at Level N
└── Fix before proceeding
Example Test Script
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
from torch.utils.data import Dataset, DataLoader
from torchvision.models import resnet50
from PIL import Image
print("=== Progressive Verification ===")
# Level 1: Basic CUDA
print("Level 1: Basic CUDA")
x = torch.randn(10, 10).cuda()
print(" PASSED")
# Level 2: Model on CUDA
print("Level 2: Model on CUDA")
model = nn.Linear(10, 5).cuda()
y = model(x)
print(" PASSED")
# Level 3: ResNet50 on CUDA
print("Level 3: ResNet50 on CUDA")
resnet = resnet50(weights=None).cuda()
print(" PASSED")
# Level 4: DataLoader (synthetic)
print("Level 4: DataLoader (synthetic)")
class DummyDataset(Dataset):
def __len__(self): return 10
def __getitem__(self, i): return torch.randn(3, 224, 224), 0
ds = DummyDataset()
loader = DataLoader(ds, batch_size=4, num_workers=0)
for x, y in loader:
x, y = x.cuda(), y.cuda()
output = resnet(x)
break
print(" PASSED")
# Level 5: Real data loading
print("Level 5: Real data loading")
# Test actual file loading here
print(" PASSED")
print("All levels passed!")
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 237 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A d098499513ae
progressive-verification-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository topprismdata/cultivating-ml-agent (4 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 1,702 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
agentsight-bugfix
AgentSight fix issues 流程。了解问题 → 复现验证 → 根因分析 → 编码修复 → 验证修复,五阶段标准化调试迭代循环。确保 AI agent 遵循最小改动、逐轮验证的修复规范。.
debug-log
查看 Prismer Evolution 插件的调试日志,诊断 hook 运行状态.
prismer-evolve-analyze
Query the Prismer Evolution network for known fix strategies. Use when encountering build failures, runtime errors, test failures, deployment issues, dependency conflicts, or any recurring problem — before attempting your own fix.
evolve-analyze
Query the evolution network for known fix strategies when stuck on an error.
aafb9b1b091b4dc00c7d838fa91f75c507e51c36045f31bccfc864a8532819f8
Use exact retained evidence.
honcho-cli
Inspect and debug Honcho workspaces via the honcho CLI. Use when investigating peer representations, memory state, session context, or dialectic quality — any task that requires introspection of a Honcho deployment, including verifying that a recall/record memory loop is actually working.