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/zernie/vigiles/verifynpx skills add zernie/vigiles --skill verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zernie/vigilesWrote 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/zernie/vigiles/verify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zernie/vigiles/verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zernie/vigiles/verify.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 | $0.00012 | $0.00230 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00115 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00046 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
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 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to verify — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Verify
Use this skill when the user wants confidence that a feature, fix, or refactor actually works.
Goal
Turn vague “it should work” claims into concrete evidence.
Workflow
- Identify the exact behavior that must be proven.
- Prefer existing tests first.
- If coverage is missing, run the narrowest direct verification commands available.
- If direct automation is not enough, describe the manual validation steps and gather concrete observable evidence.
- Report only what was actually verified.
Verification order
- Existing tests
- Typecheck / build
- Narrow direct command checks
- Manual or interactive validation
Rules
- Do not say a change is complete without evidence.
- If a check fails, include the failure clearly.
- If no realistic verification path exists, say that explicitly instead of bluffing.
- Prefer concise evidence summaries over noisy logs.
Output
- What was verified
- Which commands/tests were run
- What passed
- What failed or remains unverified
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 · 38 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 6cd36805efb8
verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository zernie/vigiles (15 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 230 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to verify, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
ralplan
Consensus planning entrypoint that auto-gates vague ralph/autopilot/team requests before execution.
remember
Review reusable project knowledge and decide what belongs in project memory, notepad, or durable docs.
embedding-strategies
Select and optimize embedding models for semantic search and RAG applications. Use when choosing embedding models, implementing chunking strategies, or optimizing embedding quality for specific domains.
docx-comment-reply
Reply to comments (批注) in Word .docx/.doc files: extract comment context, draft replies, write threaded replies back, and validate OOXML.
explaining-machine-learning-models
Explain trained machine learning models through feature attribution, local explanations, and behavior summaries. Use as an explicit/manual helper once a model already exists, not for training ownership, leakage auditing, or general ML strategy selection.
nw-ddd-eventsourcing
Event Sourcing and CQRS as DDD implementation patterns — when to use, aggregate event streams, projections, snapshots, sagas, upcasting, conflict resolution.