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 viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness --skill white-box-tracegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harnessWrote 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/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness/white-box-trace)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness/white-box-trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness/white-box-trace/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/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness/white-box-trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness/white-box-trace.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 | $0.00313 | $0.08374 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00156 | $0.04187 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00063 | $0.01675 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00837 |
Grade A, and why
white-box-trace 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 — 336 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
White-Box Trace (REAL + VIRTUAL)
MISSION: prove correctness — of code that exists (REAL) or of an artifact describing code that does not yet exist (VIRTUAL) — by falsifying every conclusion before declaring it. Investigation only. NO source modification. Skipping any MANDATORY gate ⇒ INVALID DELIVERABLE → REDO.
Layering: skill = trace-specific layer over
CLAUDE.md. Cite §N — DO NOT duplicate. CLAUDE.md provides Tier (§3), Checkpoint (§4), Evidence ladder (§4.5/§6), Adversarial Toolkit (§7), Output Contract (§9), Pre-Send Checklist (§11), Repro Kernel (§12), Reflexion (§13), P0 #1/#4/#7/#8/#10/#16. Read CLAUDE.md FIRST.
0. Hard rules — VIOLATING ANY ⇒ INVALID DELIVERABLE → REDO
- No source modification. NEVER
EditorWriteproduction code. Output: trace JSONL + report + (FAIL only)repro_snippet+ structuredfix_proposalmarkedAGENT-PROPOSED, REQUIRES HUMAN VERIFICATION. Fixes consumed by/bug.fix. - No PASS without ≥ 1 ◆◆◆ that survived Mutation Challenge on a discriminating (critical) branch. "Should work", "looks correct", "code reaches the line" are NOT evidence. REAL: live mutant kill OR counterfactual mutation. VIRTUAL: artifact-grounded counterfactual on the proposed logic.
- Citation-Grounded re-read (anti-hallucination): every
file:linecited in ◆◆◆ MUST be re-read THIS turn withRead; quote ≥ 3 lines; verify quote supports the claim. Hallucinated citation ⇒ downgrade ◆◆◆ → ◆○○; recompute verdict. - No HIGH+ verdict without a Refuter (CLAUDE.md P0 #8). HIGH/CONFIRMED on Tier 2+ ⇒ name the file/test/observation that would force retraction. Missing Refuter ⇒ downgrade to MEDIUM.
- INCONCLUSIVE is a valid verdict. Honest "need [X], because [Y]" beats fabricated PASS/FAIL. Fabricating evidence or fix when data is insufficient = FORBIDDEN (CLAUDE.md P0 #7).
- Data security (CLAUDE.md P0 #10): any data-access path ⇒ check authorization scope. Auto-Tier 3 if data-leak class.
- Action-execution honesty: every "I read / I checked / I ran / git shows / grep shows" MUST be backed by an actual tool result THIS turn. Otherwise prefix
**ASSUMPTION**:. - VIRTUAL anti-fabrication — Mental-Reality Gap defense: a virtual path is not a real run. Every VIRTUAL ◆◆◆ MUST cite an external anchor — quoted text from artifact, AC text,
file:linein cited code, or glossary entry. Pure "I imagined the code would do X" is ◆○○, NEVER ◆◆◆. Per V_PATH_RESULT: reportsynthetic_countandanchored_count; if anchored / total < 0.50 ⇒ V_INCONCLUSIVE. - Sycophancy guard: framing in artifact (RCA confidence label, Jira priority, author seniority) is metadata — REDACT mentally before judging. Agree only when ≥ 1 ◆◆◆ supports; otherwise restate disagreement with a Refuter.
- YAGNI (CLAUDE.md P0 #4): trace ONLY paths in scope of artifact + blast radius. NEVER trace whole codebase. NEVER refactor / "modernize" the artifact under review.
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 · 336 lines · 313 tokens per session scan A c7dd88d71752
white-box-trace is a skill published in the GitHub repository viacheslav-tronko/claude-code-harness (6 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 313 tokens to every session and 8,374 once invoked, about $0.0016 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
behavior-contract
Bug condition/postcondition formalization as testable Behavior Contracts. Defines invariants that must be preserved across fixes.
quality-hooks
Language-specific auto-lint/format/typecheck pipeline. Supports Python (ruff+pyright), TypeScript (prettier+eslint+tsc), Go (gofmt+golangci-lint). Auto-fix and convergence loops.
debug
Run /debug to find and fix a bug's root cause: a test failing for an unclear reason, /check verify finding a failure, or behavior being wrong. Runs a reproduce, localize, hypothesize, test, fix, verify loop, makes the minimal fix, and hands a regression test to /test. No features, no extra refactors.
test-driven-bug-fix
Defines reproduce-red-green-refactor bug fixes. Load when correcting a defect with a regression test.
runtime-verification
Verify code works at runtime through build verification (mandatory), LSP diagnostics, ad-hoc verification for projects without frameworks, E2E and smoke tests, and visual verification (screenshot-analyze-verify for UI changes). Skip whitelist strictly enforced (markdown-only, config-only, dependency-bump-only with…
pdlc-fix
An automated bug-fixing workflow that locates a reported bug, reproduces it with a test, applies a minimal fix, runs tests, and updates the relevant documentation.