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 VoDaiLocz/kilo-kit-mcp --skill verificationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/VoDaiLocz/kilo-kit-mcpWrote 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/vodailocz/kilo-kit-mcp/verification)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vodailocz/kilo-kit-mcp/verification"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vodailocz/kilo-kit-mcp/verification/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/vodailocz/kilo-kit-mcp/verification"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vodailocz/kilo-kit-mcp/verification.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00049 | $0.02315 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01157 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00463 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00231 |
Grade A, and why
fix-verification 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 5d 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 — 425 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
✅ Fix Verification Skill
Philosophy: A bug isn't fixed until it's verified. Twice.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- You've implemented a bug fix
- Someone else's fix needs verification
- Deploying a fix to production
- Bug was high-impact and needs thorough verification
- Previous fixes for this bug have failed
Do NOT use this skill when:
- Just exploring code (no fix yet)
- Bug is trivial (e.g., typo fix)
- Running standard CI (automated verification)
Prerequisites
Before starting:
- Fix has been implemented
- You know the expected behavior
- You can reproduce the original bug (or have a failing test)
- You have access to test environment
Process
Phase 1: DIRECT VERIFICATION 🎯
Goal: Confirm the fix addresses the exact reported issue.
Steps:
-
Recreate the Original Bug Scenario
Exact steps that caused the bug: 1. [step 1] 2. [step 2] 3. [step 3] Expected result: [what should happen] Previous result: [what was happening - the bug] -
Execute Test with Fix Applied
- Follow exact same steps
- Document actual result
- Compare to expected
-
Verify the FIX, Not Just Absence of Error
❌ "It doesn't crash anymore" (incomplete) ✅ "It returns the expected user object with correct fields" (complete) -
Test Multiple Times
- Run at least 3 times
- Note any inconsistency
Verification Checklist:
- Original bug scenario no longer produces error
- Expected behavior now occurs
- Result is consistent across multiple runs
- All variations of bug scenario work
Phase 2: EDGE CASE VERIFICATION 🔲
Goal: Ensure fix works for edge cases and variations.
Steps:
- Identify Edge Cases
edge_cases: boundary_values: - Empty input - Maximum length input - Minimum valid input - Just over limit - Just under limit special_inputs: - Null/undefined - Special characters - Unicode/emoji - Numbers as strings - Whitespace only state_variations: - First time user - Returning user - Admin user - Concurrent users - High load
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 425 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 9d42fa114457
fix-verification is a skill published in the GitHub repository VoDaiLocz/kilo-kit-mcp (26 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 2,315 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
browser-automation
Browser automation powers web testing, scraping, and AI agent.
godmode-shipping
BDB Shipping Godmode, the final gatekeeper for production releases. Use when running pre-launch checks, feature-flag rollouts, or rollback planning under Spec-Driven Development before a release ships.
integration-test-guard
Ensure MCP-server / API changes in the touchdesigner-mcp repo ship with integration-test coverage. Use when you modify the MCP server, tool definitions/handlers, the OpenAPI schema, the TD HTTP client, the transport layer, or the TD-side Python API (src/api, src/features/tools, src/server, src/tdClient, src/transport…
touchdesigner-self-debug
A generic workflow for self-starting TouchDesigner via computer-use (or an already-running instance), loading mcpwebserverbase.tox, and verifying any TD-side Python change (td/modules/) directly from the Textport — reading back real TD runtime values and reconciling them. Use after changing TD-side code in the…
tdmcp-test-coverage
Orchestrate any tdmcp test-coverage work: run the coverage harness, inspect coverage gaps, plan focused Vitest/msw or bridge tests, delegate coverage writers, verify coverage deltas, and re-run gates. Use whenever the user asks to raise coverage, add broad regression coverage, create a test harness, improve tests…
td-feature-qa
Quality-assure integrated tdmcp features: run the four PR gates + recipe/bridge tests, cross-boundary coherence checks (tool schema↔CLI↔docs↔registry, operator↔createable, bridge↔client), and live TouchDesigner validation (preview + post-cook error check) when the bridge is reachable. Use when…