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 zircote-plugins/auto-harness --skill validation-strategiesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zircote-plugins/auto-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/zircote-plugins/auto-harness/validation-strategies)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zircote-plugins/auto-harness/validation-strategies"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zircote-plugins/auto-harness/validation-strategies.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 | $0.00055 | $0.02012 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01006 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00402 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
validation-strategies 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 8d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 331 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 82f7d8cc99ea
validation-strategies is a skill published in the GitHub repository zircote-plugins/auto-harness (3 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 2,012 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
browser-check
Drive a real browser and come back with a MEASUREMENT rather than an impression - console errors and >=400 responses as counts, computed styles as JSON when appearance is disputed. Use when work touches UI, when a review must verify one, or when fidelity-gate asks for its measurement.
goal-test
A local experiment for testing a goal command that keeps an AI coding session working until a stated condition is judged complete. It uses a separate language model to evaluate the conversation after each assistant turn.
loop-test
A local experiment for designing repeating checks with Claude Code’s loop command. It covers both fixed intervals and checks that schedule themselves again after each run.
writing-plans
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code.
verification-before-completion
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always.
coverage-check
Run the repo's unit tests with coverage and verify that every file touched in the current change keeps line, branch, and function coverage at or above 95%. Language- and framework-agnostic. Use before committing, before PR creation, or when the user asks about coverage.