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 victusfate/scaffold --skill validategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/victusfate/scaffoldWrote 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/victusfate/scaffold/validate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/victusfate/scaffold/validate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/victusfate/scaffold/validate/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/victusfate/scaffold/validate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/victusfate/scaffold/validate.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 | $0.00059 | $0.00109 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00044 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00022 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00011 |
Grade A, and why
validate 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.
What it actually says
Read and follow the complete skill instructions in skills/validate.md.
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 · 12 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 71f387390ac6
validate is a skill published in the GitHub repository victusfate/scaffold (6 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 109 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
ai-discover
Read-only discovery step of the auto-improvement loop. One bounded agent turn per cycle reads the focus files (Read/Grep/Glob only, no shell, no subagents) and replies with a JSON array of testable surfaces {file, line, symbol, rule, message, hypothesis}; the spine authors fixes and verifies them. Discovery only — no…
evidence-audit
Evidence-led audit/fix rounds for any codebase in any language. Finds only defects that a runnable proof reproduces on current code, applies the narrowest in-scope patch, verifies with a second proof, promotes high-risk proofs to permanent regression tests, and reports exact validation results. Use whenever the user…
debugging
Use this skill when something is broken and the cause is unknown — a failing test, a crash, an error message, wrong output, a regression, a hang, or behaviour that differs between environments — and it has to be found and fixed at the root. Also use it to build the failing proof for a suspected defect before fixing…
review
Review code changes, pull requests, patches, or a scoped code area for actionable correctness, security, compatibility, and test risks with file and line evidence. Use for review or audit requests; do not use for general proofreading, feature implementation, or debugging a reported failure when the user wants a fix.
debug
Diagnose a concrete failure, regression, crash, hang, flaky test, or incorrect runtime behavior by reproducing it, testing hypotheses, and identifying the evidence-backed root cause. Use when symptoms or failing output exist; do not use for feature implementation without a failure, general code review, or a conceptual…
Skill: Verify CLI changes (example for Verify skill)
Example workflow for verifying a CLI change, as part of the Verify skill.