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 vasuag09/harness-claude --skill harness-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vasuag09/harness-claudeWrote 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/vasuag09/harness-claude/harness-verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vasuag09/harness-claude/harness-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vasuag09/harness-claude/harness-verify/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/vasuag09/harness-claude/harness-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vasuag09/harness-claude/harness-verify.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 | $0.00067 | $0.00596 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00298 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
harness-verify 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 10d 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 — 43 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/harness-verify — run the Verify phase
Thin orchestrator over the Verify skills. Goal: prove the change is production-grade before it can merge.
Sequence
-
Review — run
/harness-claude:review(delegate toharness-claude:code-reviewer); for any change touching auth/input/queries/files/external-calls/crypto/secrets, also/harness-claude:security-review(delegate toharness-claude:security-reviewer); and for any change that touched a user-facing surface (UI/page/screen/component/form/mobile/CLI-TUI), also/harness-claude:design-review(craft + a11y/UX gate). Run the applicable reviewers in parallel; skip the ones that don't apply and say so. → HALT on any Critical/High (security/correctness) or Blocker (design) finding — fix, then re-review the changed lines. -
/harness-claude:test— run the full suite (in tmux if long) + coverage. Every acceptance criterion must have a test; coverage ≥ 80% on changed code. Add missing tests viaharness-claude:tdd-guide. -
/harness-claude:verify— launch the app/feature and observe each acceptance criterion working in reality (browser screenshot for web; exercise unhappy paths). Tests passing is necessary, not sufficient. Anything tests missed → add a regression test (back to step 2). -
/harness-claude:ship— sync docs, draft the change summary from the full diff, confirm build/types/lint/tests green and no secrets/debug logs. → HALT at the git boundary: do NOT commit/push/PR. Report "ready — say the word."
Rules
- Block, don't warn, on Critical/High security or correctness findings, or design Blockers.
- If a secret is exposed: stop, rotate, sweep for siblings.
- Never run git write operations unless the user explicitly asks.
Output
Verify summary: review verdict, security verdict, design verdict (or "skipped — no UI surface"),
coverage %, observed-working evidence, docs synced, "ready to commit/PR." Then optionally
/harness-claude:harness-maintain.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 43 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 8193f9e5c61d
harness-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository vasuag09/harness-claude (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 596 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
cli-command
Design, implement, or review Composio CLI commands under ts/packages/cli using Effect, @effect/cli, services, output conventions, configuration and environment variables, and local vendor references. Use for CLI command UX, command wiring, service changes, or CLI source edits. Do not use for CLI E2E-only work; use…
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
verify
Adversarial verification — three competing agents (issue-finder, disprover, judge). Triggers "verify", "double check", "are you sure", "poke holes"; pre-prod, post-critical-fix.
proof-of-work
Run the machine-verifiable gate (typecheck/test/lint, plus a screenshot for UI) so an agent's diff is review-ready before a human sees it. Triggers "proof of work", "is this review-ready", "prove it is green".
audit-agents-skills
Audit Claude Code agents, skills, and commands for quality and production readiness. Use when evaluating skill quality, checking production readiness scores, or comparing agents against best-practice templates.
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…