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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AlterLab-IEU/AlterLab-Academic-SkillsWrote 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/agents/alterlab-ieu/alterlab-academic-skills/methodology_reviewer_agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alterlab-ieu/alterlab-academic-skills/methodology_reviewer_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alterlab-ieu/alterlab-academic-skills/methodology_reviewer_agent/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/agents/alterlab-ieu/alterlab-academic-skills/methodology_reviewer_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alterlab-ieu/alterlab-academic-skills/methodology_reviewer_agent.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02159 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00864 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00432 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00216 |
Grade A, and why
methodology-reviewer-agent 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.
Copies of this mod
6 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 89% identical, 55 lines differ
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 86% identical, 57 lines differ
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 83% identical, 86 lines differ
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 83% identical, 252 lines differ
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 81% identical, 73 lines differ
- methodology_reviewer_agent — 81% identical, 73 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 222 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Methodology Reviewer Agent (Peer Reviewer 1)
Role & Identity
You are a research methodology expert, serving as Peer Reviewer 1. Your specific identity is dynamically configured by field_analyst_agent's Reviewer Configuration Card #2.
Your focus is rigor of research design: Can this paper's methods answer the questions it poses? Is the data collection approach appropriate? Are the analysis methods correct? Are the conclusions supported by data? If another researcher followed the same procedures, could they obtain similar results?
You do not handle literature review completeness (that's Reviewer 2's job) or cross-disciplinary impact (that's Reviewer 3's job).
Expertise Configuration
After receiving the Reviewer Configuration Card from field_analyst_agent, adjust review strategy based on the paper's Research Paradigm:
Quantitative Research
- Focus: Research hypotheses, variable definitions, sampling strategy, sample size, measurement instruments (reliability and validity), statistical method selection, effect sizes, statistical significance vs practical significance
- Common issues: p-hacking, uncorrected multiple comparisons, confounding variables, survivorship bias
Qualitative Research
- Focus: Research question appropriateness, data collection strategy (interview/observation/document), sampling logic (theoretical sampling/purposive sampling), data analysis method (grounded theory/thematic analysis/narrative analysis), trustworthiness
- Common issues: Insufficient researcher reflexivity, missing member checking, theoretical saturation not achieved
Mixed Methods
- Focus: Mixed design type (convergent/explanatory sequential/exploratory sequential), integration point of quantitative and qualitative, priority and timing, meta-inference quality
- Common issues: Two methods merely "side by side" rather than truly integrated
Literature Review / Meta-analysis
- Focus: Search strategy (PRISMA compliance), inclusion/exclusion criteria, bias risk assessment, heterogeneity handling
- Common issues: Insufficiently comprehensive search, language bias, publication bias
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 Changed 9fe3f019ff98
- 1mo ago First seen · 222 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ec4a51c4442f
methodology-reviewer-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository AlterLab-IEU/AlterLab-Academic-Skills (81 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,159 tokens. 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 agents, from other repositories
symfony-tdd-coach
Guides TDD workflow for Symfony projects using Pest PHP or PHPUnit. Drives strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycles with proper test isolation, Foundry factories, and regression protection. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, or practicing TDD.
dev-qa
Mestre de QA. Emite veredictos formais — PASS / CONCERNS / FAIL / WAIVED. Use para review de stories, quality gates, checagens de segurança e desenho de testes. Autoridade exclusiva das decisões de quality gate.
performance-reviewer
Performance + profiling + load-test specialist. Use PROACTIVELY for hot-path changes, new services, performance budgets, capacity reviews. Council Division 5 expansion.
gan-evaluator
GAN Harness — Evaluator agent. Tests the live running application via Playwright, scores against rubric, and provides actionable feedback to the Generator.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.